Zoidberg wrote:I've always been under the impression that bishops/SPs are supposed to keep confessions private. Shouldn't they be disciplined for making them public knowledge?
And who is going to discipline them? Men, higher up on the food chain? Yeah, right. It's much more likely to be *wink, wink* than them getting their hands slapped.
This sounds about right. However, I don't know how they get away with such blatant CHI violations. This must be why the CHI is not available to the public - so the members don't start complaining about their ecclesiastical leaders abusing their powers.
"reason and religion are friends and allies" - Mitt Romney
Zoidberg wrote:This sounds about right. However, I don't know how they get away with such blatant CHI violations. This must be why the CHI is not available to the public - so the members don't start complaining about their ecclesiastical leaders abusing their powers.
DING DING DING! Give the girl a gold star! Got it on the first try!
I don't really get the whole idea of pretending that a relationship is the first if it wasn't. I just don't understand that at all. It appears to me that if you've had other relationships in your life that they would somehow contribute to who you are, how you interact with new relationships and essentially be a component of your past.
Why would you not want to know about a part of your partners past? Or why would anyone be afraid or hesitant to share with someone they love something about their past? Shame?
I just don't geddit. Perhaps it's just because I'm a heathen but I don't care if a man has prior lovers. Matter of fact I prefer it. Sheesh, I want no virgin.
Anyway, just a heathens .02
<edited something about embracing my inner something or other - edited for neurotic reasons>