DiscussMormonism.com

Does a bikini have moral qualities?

Does it cover the strategic areas?

Define bikini.

You nut.
:-)

bcspace wrote:Does it cover the strategic areas?

What should have been a joke exposing absurdity is unappreciated by the resident legalistic black and white thinker.

It is a tiny bikini. It covers nipples and vagina.
Oh, and the woman is exceptionally sexually attractive.

Of course, you think it irrelevent whether this happens in 1000 AD in Jerusalem, in 1400 AD Britain, in 1930s Brigham city or 2011 at Santa Monica beach. B'cause, morality ain't relative man! Riiight?

Jersey Girl wrote:Define bikini.

Definition of a bikini:

Morley wrote:

Jersey Girl wrote:Define bikini.

Definition of a bikini:

I am not eager to see your definition of porn.

Tarski wrote:I am not eager to see your definition of porn.

Ouch.

Does it cover the strategic areas?

What should have been a joke exposing absurdity is unappreciated by the resident legalistic black and white thinker.

No, it means you have difficulty with more nuanced and subtle answers than Jersey's "define bikini". I merely implied another level of complexity as in "define strategic area". For example, what strategic area does a one piece suit cover that a bikini does not?

But I undersand that grosser conversation might be more your forté. After all, you post here as an LDS critic......

Of course, you think it irrelevent whether this happens in 1000 AD in Jerusalem, in 1400 AD Britain, in 1930s Brigham city or 2011 at Santa Monica beach. B'cause, morality ain't relative man! Riiight?

I did vote in the poll and as you can see, only one option has been selected so far. No, morality isn't relative, but the circumstances are.

Edit: Now two options, but I didn't select the Droppy option.

bcspace wrote:No, morality isn't relative, but the circumstances are.

This is another way of saying, "Morality is relative. Relative to circumstances."