bcspace wrote:The conclusion by most ex and anti Mormons here is that a girl in a bikini has not effect on anyone else and that a male or female can dress any way they want and not be responsible for any effect she might have on a man because such an effect does not exist.
I get it. It's contrary to all logic and the evidence, but this is exactly what one can expect here.
just me wrote: Oh, and I see a difference between finding someone attractive, being sexually attracted, and having a sexual fantasy about someone. Those are 3 different things.
This is a good point.
BC are you talking about the sexual fantasy one here when you see a girl in a bikini?
Which one of these is bad to have BC and why should we not have it?
bcspace wrote:The conclusion by most ex and anti Mormons here is that a girl in a bikini has not effect on anyone else and that a male or female can dress any way they want and not be responsible for any effect she might have on a man because such an effect does not exist.
I get it. It's contrary to all logic and the evidence, but this is exactly what one can expect here.
Runtu wrote: Is it the buffet providers responsibility? Should they have covered the cupcakes so that I wouldn't have been overcome with gluttonous desire?
Damn right they are responsible. Rat-bastards.
Edit: I guess Bcspace will favor those who may try to sue businesses like McDonald's for their obesity.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 07, 2011 10:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Runtu wrote: And you were wrong. Sexual attraction exists within everyone. What we do with it is our responsibility.
Let me give you an analogy. All humans have a natural desire to eat, and I am hungry. I am at a buffet, and I have a real fondness for chocolate cupcakes. I'm watching my weight, so I tell myself I'm going to eat only healthy foods, such as the salads and steamed vegetables. But, I see a huge table spread with chocolate cupcakes. I can't control myself, and I eat all of them such that I get sick and vomit.
Is it the buffet providers responsibility? Should they have covered the cupcakes so that I wouldn't have been overcome with gluttonous desire?
Maybe you should've just licked those cupcakes? :)
I love the cupcake analogy. Here is the thing....BC seems to be saying that having your mouth water is actually the problem. Even if you turn away from the table and do not partake, the fact that your mouth watered is the problem.
~Those who benefit from the status quo always attribute inequities to the choices of the underdog.~Ann Crittenden ~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~
BCspace, you can stop worrying about your sexual thoughts, by the way. The brethren have said that gay sexual thoughts are not a sin, so it follows that it's the same for breeders.
You're welcome!
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
just me wrote:I love the cupcake analogy. Here is the thing....BC seems to be saying that having your mouth water is actually the problem. Even if you turn away from the table and do not partake, the fact that your mouth watered is the problem.
You're just denying that hunger exists. Clearly you believe that people can put out whatever kinds of unhealthy pastries they want with no effect on anyone. It's like a window into your darkened soul.