View Full Version : Questions on Morals

11-07-2001, 09:06 PM

I am struggling with somethings lately, mostly views on sex. I have had a sexual relationship with two different guys. Both were monogamous relationships where I truly loved the guy. Well I have friends who disapprove of everything that I do. I honestly don't feel that it is wrong within a relationship to share love in the form of sex. But my friends show so much disapproval. They tell me not to give into temptation...blah blah blah...going to hell...blah blah blah...those are your demons to work through...blah blah blah. My sex life comes up again and again, it gets made fun of and picked on. And this is by people who I considered close enough to be my best friends and share my inner secrets. I don't question their judgement to abstain, not that they have ever been in the situation because none of them have had serious relationships with guys at all, so why do they judge mine? So on top of it I feel like they are hypocrits. I feel guilty not because inside I feel it is wrong but because I get called a slut and a whore by my best friends. They say well it is only joking. It is destroying some of my self confidence. I have talked to them about it but they laugh it off saying once again that if it is making me feel bad then I shouldn't be doing that. I know Iam not a slut but it makes me feel badwhen they say I am, just as it would make me feel bad for them to call me ugly when I am not. But they just don't seem to care, and it angers me. It is like they are trying to guilt me into acting a way that doesn't necessarily fit what I want. Anyway, I guess I am just venting some frustration. Thanks.



11-07-2001, 09:45 PM
i think it is a personal decision and no one person can tell you what is right for you. only YOU know what is right for you. it sounds like you had good relationships and sex can be a great thing. don't let your friends make you feel bad just because they have been brought up thinking that sex is immoral.

i think you should try to find some more accepting open minded friends, people who are not going to judge you, as it is not our job to judge other people. either that, or declare the sex topic off limits since you guys are never going to agree and it only creates friction.

good :clover


vespertine :dragon

:hugon :usa :world :peace :hugoff

11-07-2001, 10:06 PM

"because I get called a slut and a whore by my best friends"

Well geez, with friends like that who needs enemies?

Sometimes people use religion and "morals" for the wrong reason. . .to make other people feel bad and therefore make themselves look good and feel in control.

In reality none of us is perfect and none of us can jugde. Maturity means opening your mind to other ways of life and accepting that some people are different, but that doesn't make them wrong.

Friends are not meant to destroy your confidence or judge you.

They aren't your friends. Move on. It's better to be alone than surrounded by negativity.

There are other people who will love and accept you just as you are!

Stay strong, have faith.


11-08-2001, 05:22 AM
I personally view religion with a look of absolute disdain. I am open to the idea of 'The Creator', a God if you like, but it is the religious framework and hierarchy that I disagree with. because I view religion as something used to control people, keep them, down, keep them in their place. One looks at the way certain religions treat women as second class citizens as a key pointer...

But hey, this isn't the place for one of my splenetic religious diatribes. Your 'friends' (and I use that word in the loosest possible sense) sound like an utter bunch of arseholes! It isn't the sex that is making you feel bad, it is being judged by a total pious, pompous bunch of narrow-arrowed bastards. Are your friends religious by any chance? Because they sound narrow-minded enough to be part of some religion.. s'funny, how so many religions preach tolerence yet are completely harsh on people who don't adhere to their standards...

Honey, if you've had two monogamous sexual relationships, you are not a whor ein my book. And if these people who call you a slut and a whore are apparently doing it jokingly, then they will not mind if you turn round and accuse them of being 'evil scum-sucking bigoted filth who deserve to be slung down the nearest drainage ditch and stamped upon with a pair of high heels'. Why? Because you only said it as a joke and if they are that fond of jokes, they should be rolling in the iasles at that one.

(Note: this is sarcasm directed at your 'friends').

You are no slut. Time to get some new friends, ones whose heads aren't up their arses.

:love and strangely angry words,


11-08-2001, 09:04 AM
Thank you all so much for your posts. I knowI need to find better friends, but in a place where I am where it is only ********% female it is hard to find girls to befriend. I am learning to be happy on my own though...so I guess there is a silver lining. When I come back to my room in the evening and I am theonly one there, I am very happy. THank you so much, you all have given me assurance that it is notmy morals that are necessarily wrong but my friends. God bless us all in our recovery. :)



11-08-2001, 06:11 PM
yeah, well, i was always sort of free sexually, and i had to suffer some comments too.
but the truth of the matter is that people - women especially are really raised to think that sexuality shouldn't be advertised,
and maybe not, but i think being afraid to live out your desires is just a way of denial of the soul, you wouldn't deny yourself art or reading but somehow sex is dirty.
well, i disagree, and my friends have since grown up and i have made them all address their own issues with sex, which was just nonsense forced on them by way of other people's "morals" and opinions...... hahahaha
i love it when my friends who have shoplifted and cheated on tests and destroyed property would say i was immoral for enjoying sex and not being afraid to let my body live- with the correct precautions of course- meanwhile i suppose stealing and destruction and lying is all ok.
all of those people have come back to apologize- as they well should have. but really our society which has sex dripping off every commercial and tv show but somehow says that men can fornicate and women can't is full of crap and makes women ashamed of sexual desire.
but it's normal, we're animals after all. and as long as you are safe and don't do it for the wrong reasons, forgive yourself and tell your friends to start thinking for themselves and get liberated. it's not nineteenfifty and we can wear pants and work outside the home and make our own decisions now.....
and maybe check out a book entitled slut in the women's issues section of their local bookstore.

11-10-2001, 08:39 AM


As some one who is, to use Andy's term, 'religious' (or to use my term, 'has faith':cute) I am shocked and horrified by the behaviour of your 'friends'. Don't think Jesus would have treated you like that somehow. Don't think he would have called you a 'whore'. How appalling!:mad

I admire your decision to try & create a life for yourself on your own.:yay However, I'm thinking that you might hanker after some involvement in a group of young people & the social life that it brings. I'm thinking that perhaps you could arm yourself to deal with the sad 'humour' that is fired by your friends' own insecurities. You don't have to explain yourself to anyone of course, but perhaps if you think around the subject area a bit, even do some reading, you will be in a position to challenge the narrow mindedness of your friends. Perhaps you could ask them to explain exactly what they mean; I would be interested to know what their concept of 'hell' is (I rather think that their vision might involve an eternal fire!:ohboy). I would also like to see them justify their behaviour in Christian terms (if 'Christians' they are). Maybe remind them of a story in John chapter eight where a woman who was caught in adultery (not something that you have committed). A group of people including pharisees and teachers of the law were about to stone her to death, but Jesus said, 'Let he who is wthout sin cast the first stone.' Neat eh? The woman was thus freed from condemnation, physical, mental & spiritual. In another episode, a prostiture comes along & washes Jesus' feet with her hair, tears & an expensive bottle of perfume. Jesus doesn't say 'Get lost - you're a pro' - but his disciples pretty much do. And Mary Magdalene, a staunch follower of Jesus, is thought to have been a prostitute.

What I'm saying here is not that you are a prostitute (!) but that if Jesus can love the people whom society deems as 'low', then your friends are seriously not doing a good job of reflecting that love to a perfectly normal woman like yourself - and you have the right to challenge them about that. In fact, it would do them good to hear it!

In terms of your morals, well, I do believe in God & in moral absolutes, but with some flexibility. As part of this moral framework, I think that different people are in different places; as such, they must act according to their moral lights & as their conscience informs them. It is not for me to judge. It is between God and yourself.:angel I only think that God wants us to do one thing: to do our best.


11-10-2001, 10:14 AM
Right on Becky....I couldn't have said it better!
Sounds like your friend are just jealous!:supergrin
:love beth

11-10-2001, 03:45 PM
:hugon KIM :hugoff

hey! you poor thing, thats way to mean of your mean of your friends! but i understand. i started sleeping with my bf a while ago too, we had a long term serious relationship and my friends would do EXACTLY the same thing, and even though i knew they were kidding or that their opinions didnt matter it still hurts. then they got serious bfs and let me tell you they're having a hell of a lot more sex then i am. people are stupid eh?
ignore them. if you love the people and if you beleive you are doing the right thing then just dont tell others your having sex. its your business and you definitly dont deserve to hear those comments. do what you feel comfortable with. in fact it seems like they are just maybe a bit jealous for you expirencing some type of relationship when they are not? and yes its gonna make you feel slutty when they tell you that you are so dont listen to them when they tell you if your feeling guilt you should stop.

listen to YOU. do what you think is right. and if i were you id avoid bringing up sex with these people until they are mature enough to handle the topic. good luck

:love whitney

11-10-2001, 06:30 PM
Well, I have a 'faith'. I believe in the idea that humans are generally good, that I won't get destroyed by someone, I have faith in Louisa, belief in her. I also believe that if I live my life in a way that doesn't hurt other people, then I am OK. I drink, I smoke, sometimes I even do sexual things.. none of that makes me wrong, makes me a sinner. Because through doing that, I hurt nobody, I don't impinge on anyone's territory or space and crush someone's feelings. It is the whole way religion is used that I disagree with, the framework and hierarchy that goes with each belief. It seems controlling to me and I don't like that.

Sex before marriage is not a sin to me. If it is between two people much in love, people living for that, people who care and respect each other... that's fabulous. I know that in my life, the one person I have been sexual with means everything to me. So no sinning went on.

In a world where religious factions fight and argue, a bit of penetration is not a sin to me. Women, be proud of having a sexuality! Be confident in having it, be comfrotable with it, don't be afraid of being judegd for being able to say 'I enjoy sexual things'. I'm male, I don't live in that stereotyped male way of being a 'stud' (god I hate that word). A woman who is confident about her sexual self is a powerful thing. Be sure in yourself.

And don't let any small-minded bigots tell you that you are a sinner for not falling between their own narrow-minded viewpoints.



11-10-2001, 08:16 PM
I had to come back on this one & respond to a few of Andy's points, though I'm kind of wonering whether they belong on this board...hope so.:shy

Well, it sounds like we have qualitatively very different 'faiths', but I'll leave that to one side. I understand what you're talking about when you refer to the religious hierachies which you see as oppressive. I can only speak from the standpoint of a Christian believer - & an Anglican at that - and I will do so. I see that religious institutions have been employed for political reasons to suppress the masses in many countries, including our own. It's a misuse of religion. But I kind of think we've moved beyond that here in the UK - don't you? Another thing that I note is the intimate connection between the secular and the sacred. The Church of England was formed in part because Henry VIII wanted a divorce - which is hardly noble - and the King James Bible came into existence for entirely political reasons. Yet God seems to rise above this: I've managed to 'find' God within the Anglican Church & I also love the King James & regard it as a great blessing to me personally.

But the idea that there is a hierachy is in the church is actually erroneous. Certainly there is a structure - but that is for the purpose of building a community & sharing teaching, prayer & worship. The Archbishop of Canterbury is a leader, but he is not more or less important than anyone else in the church; he is 'the first among equals'. I'll tell you why I think this. Acts chapters one & two describe an event that occured after the ascension. The disciples ('the twelve') kept gathering together in a room with a group of believers, so that they were said to have numbered one hundred and twenty in total. At Pentecost, along comes the Holy Spirit, fills each of them & gives them the gift of tongues. It wasn't just the priviledged twelve who were blessed in this way, it was the whole hundred and twenty. Furthermore, there were women present (Mary was there) and they too were given the gift of tongues. This symbolises the equality of all who were present, for as it was said by one Dr. Abernathy, "At the foot of the cross, the ground is level". This is completely in keeping with the life and teachings of Jesus, who was crucified precisely because he was challenging the established authority. He pointed out the hypocrisy of the religious elders, who lived in fantastic luxury while the masses subsisted, &, even worse, he said that everyone could be forgiven directly through him rather than the established religious authorities.

The fact that these values are not always reflected in the church is indicative of the fact that we do not cease to become normal, fallible human beings once we become Christians.

In a way I feel that what you are exhibiting is a kind of inverse bigotry. It seems that you have a very narrow & fixed view of religion that is not necessarily accurate. I myself have found my faith liberating & not repressive in any sense at all. Also, don't you think the church does some good stuff? Any church worth its salt (& I admit that not all are worth their salt:sarcasm) has any number of initiatives going at any one time, generally community projects of a practical nature such as helping homeless people & usually some charitable causes that they are supporting too.

On a different tack, I would have to take issue with the idea that your smoking isn't harming anybody. It is obviously harming you for a start. Why is it okay to harm yourself? Also, self-harm has rebound effects. If you end up with lung or throat cancer, or some other disease as a result of your smoking, then die prematurely, you will most certainly be hurting the people who love you. I'm not judging you, just offering an opinion.

:hugonKim:hugoff A point I forgot to include earlier. Celebrating your sexuality is most definitely Biblical! Read the Song of Songs for a start; the man is forever going on about the woman's breasts being 'like gazelles' & other stuff...:cheesy


11-11-2001, 06:54 PM
Most interesting indeed…

OK then.. my right to reply. Firstly, my original reply was not an attack on religion. One sees the good that it can do, my grandmother is a very committed Christian, does a lot of charity work and that’s fine. I have no problem with that at all. I don’t like the control that religion can have over a person’s life. Politics and religion, do they mix still? Not in the controlling sense in Britain now but they are still mingled, the role of the Queen in Parliament and as head of the Church of England sees to that.

It is the idea of religious intolerance that I do not like. Last month, the head of the Catholic Church openly mocked the Archbishop of Canterbury for the falling attendance figures of his denomination. That smacked of sure childish one-upmanship. I see the children of the Holy Cross School being pelted with missiles for walking in an area that has a majority belonging to a different denomination to them. Religious intolerance is responsible for an awful lot of hurt in this world. Hello the Crusades…

I personally believe in some form of humanist ideal. That you treat others well, you respect others even if you do not particularly like the way they live, act or talk. I don’t follow a set religion. I try to help people when I can. I don’t spit on them. Is that enough to get into heaven?

My use of ‘hierarchy’ is that I dislike all organisations with a head. It isn’t a slander at religion in general. This is due to my gross level of intolerance of government institutions, three of which I have worked for and all have been run by absolute morons. My favourite moron is Estelle Morris, the current Education Secretary for simply being foolish and blind to reality. But that’s another story…

“In a way I feel that what you are exhibiting is a kind of inverse bigotry. It seems that you have a very narrow & fixed view of religion that is not necessarily accurate.”

Hmm, strong words indeed. The word bigotry is one that does not sit easily with myself in the basis of a written piece and for you to judge me as that on the lines of one piece is a little remonstrative. I know what I have read, seen, been through in terms of my religious background. So to be called a bigot does get me swishing the Wolverine-style verbal claws a little. A bigot is one who, according to my reference source, is ‘a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own’. For me to harp on about the wrongs of religious and societal intolerance and to close of my mind would be gross hypocrisy. I assure you I am not close-minded, ask any of the people with which communicate on a regular basis and for you to say that you feel I am bigoted does irritate me. The only thing I am intolerant of is intolerance, whether it be toward people of a different religion, gender, creed, sexuality, football team, whatever.

As for smoking as a form of self-harm… people die from heart attacks exercising, saturated fats, alcohol, all manner of goodies. If we were going to go into Spinal Tap territory, the classic ‘bizarre gardening accident’ would have to come into that. I choose to smoke, it relaxes me a great deal. The reason I started was because it helped me control the panic attacks that developed after being mugged by three ‘gentlemen’ and being smeared all over the pavements of Worcester. Sure I could end up with throat and lung cancer. One is hardly a serial smoker right now. In terms of bodily damage, I have damaged myself more playing sodding cricket, ask every one of the broken fingers, broken wrist, damaged cruciate ligaments and cartilage on both knees, the broken toe, the ingrown toenail due to being hit by a fast delivery from a Pakistani test match bowler.. each to their own really.

Madam, a most excellent reply from you and one that gives me much to think about. One is always open to constructive words and yours were excellent. I still haven’t decided to turn to God though. Rock and roll wins out first. :supergrin

Thanking you for your time,


11-11-2001, 09:50 PM

Sounds like you really need to have a serious talk with your friends. I'm not saying drop them becuase all relationships (friends, family, romantic, all of them) have areas of disagreement and it's important to respect differences. Try explaining to your friends that you find their jokes offensive and hurtful, i am sure that is not the intent. At the same time you need to be respectful of their views, i don't know how much they know about your sex life and how much you tell them, but if you are against sex before marriage then comming in and telling them how great it was last night also isn't appropriate. Sometimes friends just need to agree to disagree...tell them you respect their decision but that you have found that your decision works for you, ask them if something you say or do around them makes them uncomfortable (if something comes up make a true effort to curtail this action or topic).

I actually have some friends who i do not discuss sex with, i am a fairly...no wait change that to very, conservative person in that i am not comfortable talking to most people about sex and after explaining this to my friends who would constantly bring it up we have agreeded to certain topics (ie "great" porn, sex toys, etc...)that are offlimits and it is more comfotable for all involved this way.

Give your friends a chance, speak to them honestly and tell them that you are hurt by their "jokes"...tell them you do not wish to push your morals on them and thus do not wish to have theirs pushed on you...

well that's my thoughs and experiences, for whatever they are worth...

take care,

11-12-2001, 05:59 PM
Hm, are you doing enough to get into heaven? I dunno, maybe you'd better check with God & his scoring board?:sarcasm

I certainly hope my :dogs are going there - cos if they aren't, then I'm not going either! Heaven would be no good without dogs, it'd be hell for me if that was the case....But I look to the story of the arc as an allegorical pointer.:cheesy

I'm not surprised you feel rankled about me calling you a 'bigot'. I did realise that you would feel angry at the time of writing it & meant to expand & explain the point a little, but got carried away wth other thoughts and forgot about it. I don't think that you are a bigot as such - as you said, I have no right to say that on the basis of a couple of short written pieces. I don't think that you are a Richard Dawkins - now there's an annoying git if ever there was one, albeit with a gift for writing...Ooops, that wasn't very 'loving' of me was it? Oh well, guess I'm not perfect yet.

My point was that, however broad minded you may in fact be, some of your words didn't reflect that.
I personally view religion with a look of absolute disdain.
I view religion as something used to control people...But hey, this isn't the place for one of my splenetic religious diatribes.
Are your friends religious by any chance? Because they sound narrow-minded enough to be part of some religion.

Can you see that such remarks might get my back up somewhat? Can you see that I might draw the conclusion that, actually, you might not respect people who have a religious faith?

I'm interested to hear about your views on hierachy. I'm sure you have an idea about how the government & institutions such as the church could be run without a leader. Personally, I don't see how the church could be sustained without organization & leadership by those well trained in theology etc. The free churches have a much looser structure, but they have a structure nevertheless....:ohboy

I'm not very impressed by that comment from the Pope either, though I hadn't heard about it. He's clearly not perfect either. Could it be that age & infirmity is getting to him? It was a strange remark for him to make given that the catholic church is also losing numbers in Britain. In fact the only churches that are continuing to grow over here are the free churches. Actually, I attended Roman Catholic secondary school & sixth form & I have to say, I do find that denomination overly authoritarian for my tastes. I also think that the Vatican seriously needs overhauling.

Of course, the Anglican church has been guilty of many of the same things as Catholicism; frankly, they haven't been doing their job. For years, the church failed to evangelise, sitting back complacently instead & expecting the people to just keep on turning up - and fo course they didn't (:surprise). Only in recent years have the clergy awoken to this fact. But things are beginning to change at last. You have only to look at the phenomenon of the Alpha Course.

If I may quote myself, I think that the key sentence in my past reply was this:

"The fact that [Jesus'] values are not always reflected in the church is indicative of the fact that we do not cease to become normal, fallible human beings once we bencome Christians."

This really is the point. I mean, not all Christians really are Christians for a start (there's planty of people in my family who are like that, church-goers who don't have a clue, don't want to find out more & aren't even very nice if I'm honest). Those who are genuinely Christian at heart often lack wisdom & judgement & do things wrong, like letting paedophiles become clergy for example. We had one at my C of E primary school & when he was found out he killed himself horribly...It was not a nice business.

When it comes to religious intolerance, again, this is not in the spirit of what Jesus said is it? I mean, Christianity is a missionary faith, but evangelising is in itself only a dissemination of the facts as we see them, for people to do with what they will. Free will is, after all, a fundamental principle of Christianity & constitutes a central explanation in the theodicies. When people start bickering over religion, I don't think that it is religion that is at fault, I think it's people. Some of whom are looking for a fight, others of whom get swept along.

When it comes to war, it seems to me that most of them boil down to the same old things: territory, money, power. They may or may not be coated in religious justification. If they are declared in the name of religion, then it is an abuse of faith, & not as it ought to be.

It seems to me that people are quite good enough at creating wars by themselves with or without religion. And the religious divide in Ireland is really about politics isn't it (going back to the seventeenth century for heaven's sake).

You know, I am a natural atheist (and a former atheist for that matter). I really am. I love scientific explanations. I used to find Richard Dawkins very compelling actually! But God sort of found me. The further I ran, the less I could escape him.

You said in conclusion to your first reply that your words were 'strangely angry'. I was struck by that too. You are very angry aren't you? But I'm not entirely sure that it's just about a subset of narrow-minded people. There's a real strength of force there that I picked up on.

Finally, to return to your smoking....:ummm I take your point about the general wear and tear on our bodies brought about by life in general. But I really don't think that an ingrown toenail is not on a level with cancer. The fact is, smoking is incredibly damaging to the body - life-threatening - & it is not even necessary. As someone who used to suffer panic attacks & has anxiety levels to rival Ally McBeal, there really are other things you can do to wind down, things that are actually beneficial to the body & not destructive. And you know this.

Thanks for reading - this is very interesting.

11-12-2001, 06:42 PM
Ah, Catholicism.. my home town has a very large catholic secondary school, the only one for miles around, hence it being large and well stuffed with cash. They also have primary and infant schools close by. I agree with you on the authoritarianism demonstrated by Catholicism, one of my favourite memories is one of my freinds who went through these Catholic schooling systems telling me how as an infant, the nuns tried to make him write with his right hand (he is left-handed) because writing left-handed was the Devil's work... curiously, my secondary comprehensive was directly opposite this Catholic secondary and they had far more drugs and sex episodes. Challenging authority? You'd better believe it.

As for my original words.. yeah, I was on rather the over-urgent trip on the religious views and it is easy to see how they could be taken as the views of a Bible-burning uberhound. Apologies for that and rest assured that if I ever meet you, I would buy you a nice cup of tea and a bun instead of strapping you to a burning cross and frogmarching you down the street shouting 'baaaaaaaaaaaaad person'.

I'm not really an angry person. Anyoen angry tends to have well-ironed creases and I have none. Veryordered people, I remain scruffy. Yes, that bit of spleen originally was aimed atthe narrow-minded religious types, the same way it would be aimed at anyoen narrow-minded, racist, homophobic, sexist, Welshist (ha!) etc etc etc. I aim my spleen at those people, not the free, open-minded people. They are tasteful and fragrant in my eyes. I'm sure that if we ever talked, you'd find me non-angry and probably be immensely amused by my impersonation of Buster Keaton.

The Anglican church sounds like a far better system and your posts have made me go out and read up during my day off today. One can never take in too much information. Incidentally, it wasn't the Pope who made the comment about the attendence figures for CoE congregations, I neglected to add 'Head of the Catholic Church in England' to that piece. My mistake. I doubt the Pope can actually string together a legible sentence anyway, most sad to see the state he is in.

Religion and war do seem inexorably embroiled and I take your point as to politics being before religion in Ireland. it's when one fith almost bumps against another (ie. a political faith and a religious faith) that trouble starts. All part of that imperfect world I suppose. And we are all human and imperfect. Some are more imperfect than others.

As for smoking.. well, there are other things I could do to calm my brain. James Dean would never have had the impact he did if he'd been using a patch though. In my own broad comedy way, I have no desire to live until I hit three figures. Sixty is quite enough for me. I always did prefer Peter Cook to the Queen Mother anyway. And Princess Margaret.. eek, she gives up the fags and booze and now she has to be wheeled around. Somebody should pop a Dalek base onto her legs and make her strut round Blenheim Palace shouting 'Exterminate'.

:love and VWORP VWORP noises,

Doctor Who?

PS: And unlike the other 'Andi', i am free to talk about porn at all hours. :supergrin

11-12-2001, 07:07 PM
I hate to interupt here, but this really is getting off the topic and is definatly not about tolerance...Every organization has its flaws, including governments and churches these are inherent in sytems run by humans.

Religon is about finding what works for you; whether that be an athiestic or agnostic point of view, pegan, muslum, buddist, confuscioust, jewish, catholic, anglican, lutheran...you get the idea. these are your beleifs! The bowl is not a place to mock the beleifs of other.

General mocking of others is simply inappropriate, including members and non (such as the comment about the pope being able to sting a sentence together). I urge you to both look at what this coversation is about, and if you feel that it is something you would like to continue...please take it elsewhere...

Kim, i do hope you have gotten out of this post what you wanted...i am going to red flag this for it's direction, and the rest is up to the big fish...

take care of yourselfs,

11-12-2001, 07:13 PM
Mocking the beliefs of others? Where exactly have I done that? My comment about the Pope was not done in a 'ha ha, look he's ill' way, I have genuine sympathy for the man having seen family members fall under the same medical affliction. It is a horrible condition and not one I would wish upon anyone. As for mocking members... if you are refering to the little comment at the end of my last reply, then that is not mocking you at all or taking the piss or whatever. If I wanted to attack people, i would be far more blatant. I have no reason to attack people so don't assume that I am.

Thank you.

11-12-2001, 09:53 PM
It was not at all the comment at the end of the last post, go back and read the thread from the perspective of someone with deep seated catholic beleifs! I'm sure you will find it less than satisfying.

I guess what i would have been better to say was that you were making gross generalizations and judgements of groups based upon your limited experience with them!

You have not offended me (that would be very hard to do), i just don't think that this is the most appropriate forum for disussing your personal distase for organized religion, if you want to discuss this issue i encourage you to go over the the spirituality forum and discuss it.

and you can look at and talk about all the porn you want, doesn't bother me, i personally don't find it appealing and thus do not enjoy long conversations on the topic...

take care,

11-13-2001, 11:22 AM
I appreciate a good debate/discussion as much as the next person, but this post has gotten way off topic from the original support the poster was asking for.

Take care of YOU