DiscussMormonism.com

DarkHelmet wrote:I don't mind the walking porn. If you've got it, flaunt it. But if you don't got it, cover up.
[#img] http://thebrownleeblog.files.wordpress. ... ctures.jpg[/img]

[#img] http://i3.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article ... medley.jpg[/img]
She is not so ugly - but not less dangerous.

Three years ago, she split with a boyfriend after he nearly died when she suffocated him during sex.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/cl ... st-1827385

Chris Willgoose somehow I found that funny! Maybe he needs to get SCBA certified.

bcspace wrote:

Today a beard is still too often a sign of rebellion for it to come back into favor.

Maybe for Mormons.

Catholics and Orthodox, not at all.

I'm so sad men dress in boring clothes. The only place we get to wear tights is on a bike! Boo!

Blaming women for the way they dress is like blaming cake for the way it tastes. "It's not my fault I'm 300 lbs. The cake was just begging to be eaten!"

Certainly, dressing seductively raises a woman's risk factor, but even if she's walking down the street naked, we'd still chuck an asshole in jail if he assaulted her. I think it's far more reasonable to expect men to control themselves than to expect women to dress a particular way.

I will defend to the death a woman's right to dress attractively.

Yet it is only a man who can say what inflames his desire for a woman. It's interesting that attraction is probably genetic yet there is probably no genetically based counter reaction to "cover up".

Wait a minute! the atheist says. So this desire to enforce modesty is merely social/cultural? Then it's all relative.

Now hold on! says the believer. If it's all relative, then there is no reason for any modesty or self control whatsoever as that is merely social/cultural as well. We might as well act on every natural desire from dressing to attract to all sexual impulses etc.

So basically if we followed the atheist's logic, women would be dragged down in the streets and malls to be impregnated on the spot at any man's whim. Of course if society behaved this way, there probably wouldn't be any malls or streets. We would still be swinging from the branches philosophizing about whether or not we should come down from of the trees or whether or not coming out of the oceans was a good idea in the first place.

We have rules for a reason and frankly, some of these rules come from God. That's the only logical explanation as even most atheists have some moral quality which, if they are honest with themselves, don't come from society or culture because an atheist eschews that as a valid source for reasonable action.

(That is an allusion to the Spirit of Christ by the way)

Game goes to the believer.

bcspace wrote:
Yet it is only a man who can say what inflames his desire for a woman. It's interesting that attraction is probably genetic yet there is probably no genetically based counter reaction to "cover up".

Wait a minute! the atheist says. So this desire to enforce modesty is merely social/cultural? Then it's all relative.

Now hold on! says the believer. If it's all relative, then there is no reason for any modesty or self control whatsoever as that is merely social/cultural as well. We might as well act on every natural desire from dressing to attract to all sexual impulses etc.

So basically if we followed the atheist's logic, women would be dragged down in the streets and malls to be impregnated on the spot at any man's whim. Of course if society behaved this way, there probably wouldn't be any malls or streets. We would still be swinging from the branches philosophizing about whether or not we should come down from of the trees or whether or not coming out of the oceans was a good idea in the first place.

We have rules for a reason and frankly, some of these rules come from God. That's the only logical explanation as even most atheists have some moral quality which, if they are honest with themselves, don't come from society or culture because an atheist eschews that as a valid source for reasonable action.

(That is an allusion to the Spirit of Christ by the way)

Game goes to the believer.

It interesting to watch how extreme bias can make bcspace so stupid. Atheists only sees the morality comes from man only, not that we shouldn't have any morals. If you want to really discuss these issues you might try understanding first what the arguments are.

If you want to really discuss these issues you might try understanding first what the arguments are.

Done and done. If from the mind only, then again, it's all relative. The scriptures predicted this long ago. 2 Nephi 2:13

ZelphtheGreat wrote:seeking to excuse your buddies who rape the women and girls, are you?

Its arc welder time again...

bcspace wrote:

If you want to really discuss these issues you might try understanding first what the arguments are.

Done and done. If from the mind only, then again, it's all relative. The scriptures predicted this long ago. 2 Nephi 2:13

Again you provide nothing to the discussion. Like I said, extreme bias like your really makes you extraordinarily stupid on these issues.

cinepro wrote:
Are you really analogizing women to inanimate baked goods?

Who would think of equating females to a bakery item, such as cupcakes, unless they had some frosting fetish.