Women and horses?

Sub4Life · Jan 31, 2010

I'm a Christian also, Sebastian, and grew up in a strongly Catholic family, and am still very much influenced by my religion, and I do think there is a code of right and wrong. I think it is everyones right to be able to disagree with me, and tell me I am wrong. That is there beleif.

And to Kittengrey, there most certainly is wrong. Murdering, raping, stealing. That's wrong. I can see circumstances when stealing is neccesary (in a third world country. In places like britain, America, Germany, so on, I dont think there is a good reason to steal, there are other options)

And if someone is coming at you with a knife, you should be able to defend yourself even if that means killing them.

But I dont see how things like beating a child, raping someone, child or adult, murdering in cold blood, betraying someone, ect. can not be classified as wrong.

I know people want to be different and say it doesnt matter what society says, and in some cases it doesnt, but murder? I have to agree with society on that one. Rape. Slavery. I'd put that in the definite "wrong" catagory.

Sparrow69 · Jan 31, 2010

sebastian said:
Legality aside (since we started with morality, not law), Sparrow, you just agreed that rape, torture, and nonconsensual servitude were morally acceptable, that there was nothing immoral about antebellum slavery.("It was fine for [southerners] to live as they did.") If it was acceptable then, how can it be immoral now? Since it depends entirely on the context of those doing it, on what basis can we say rape is immoral now? Many immigrants come from cultures where rape is not always seen as immoral, so for them it should be moral. We can't say that they have to accept our morality, because it's wrong to impose morality on others.

Who says its immoral now? By your own volition, many immigrants come from places where its an acceptable way of life. Furthermore, since only 1 out of 7 rapes is reported in this country, I think its safe to say that the apathy of mankind has made it a way of life here. I never said any of those things were immoral. what I DID say was they were illegal. And your exactly correct, we CAN'T impose our morality on them, but here in this country, we can enforce the law. I'm glad we agree on that.

To abstract it further, on what basis is it wrong to impose morality on others. If my morality says it's immoral to allow moral failings to go uncorrected, then saying I can't do it is imposing your moral standards on me.

On the basis of our legal constitution. You have the legal right to divulge in your own free will, so long as your doing so does not infringe on the liberties of others.

The further you follow this line of reasoning, the further it unravels. I remain convinced that there are some fixed moral points.

And i still contend for every fixed moral point, i will show you a culture that acts completely counteractive to said moral point. Thats what we have laws and our forefathers had the wisdom to realize that a proper government of the people would have to do things without personal views or beliefs, if we were ever to be a nation that would not discriminate.

Kitten, what your example points to is not that stealing is not wrong, but that there is a hierarchy of morality, in which self-preservation or the support of one's family is a greater moral imperative than the imperative to not take what does not belong to you. It also points to the fact that moral systems have points of conflict, just as legal ones do.

I believe what she's trying to point out is that under certain circumstances, what you feel to be immoral would suddenly cease to be. Meaning that what you perceive as stark white and pitch black boundries, are merely just another shade of the grey.

InnocentFacade · Jan 31, 2010

I'm curious, Sebastian. As a proclaimed christian who seems to be hellbent on equating religious norms to human morality, do you also believe that because you're gay you are, let me see here. Ah yes, "An abomination", and that you "shall surely be put to death"? or that you "shall not inherit the kingdom of God"? All direct quotes from your holy book.

Sub4Life · Jan 31, 2010

InnocentFacade said:
I'm curious, Sebastian. As a proclaimed christian who seems to be hellbent on equating religious norms to human morality, do you also believe that because you're gay you are, let me see here. Ah yes, "An abomination", and that you "shall surely be put to death"? or that you "shall not inherit the kingdom of God"? All direct quotes from your holy book.

I think it is potentially dangerous to get into a debate on the Bible. Since to some people, it is a very important and sacred book that should not be used to hurt others, nor should it be ridiculed.

That being said, not everyone beleives the bible word for word. I am a vey relgioius person. I've gone to Catholic schools for a long time, and am currently attending a Catholic college, but I dont take the bible litterally. You can't.

My Aunts are both gay and will be getting married soon,and I dont think they are going to hell or are an abomination. So I am sure, just because Sebastian is gay, and a Christian, doesnt mean he thinks those things of himself.

No one should take the bible litterally, seeings as it as written by men, and not Jesus himself. (only his direct quotations should be taken litterally, even then, they are stories with different meanings behind them.)

But, someones religion does dictate what they find moral. I dont think he is trying to force his idea of morality on anyone. Just his right to beleive what is moral and speak that beleif.

He says somthing is moral, and others say that either, there is no such thing as immoral, or that he has no right to decide what is moral and whats not. But he does, we all do. What I find moral is different from what others do, but we all have our right to voice that opinion

sebastian · Jan 31, 2010

IF, you misunderstand me. I'm not trying to impose my own religious morality on anyone. I mentioned my religious beliefs to distinguish between my own personal morality and what I think is a universal moral position. If that wasn't clear, I apologize, and I apologize if I've offended you. I would never demand that you have to accept my religious beliefs, or indeed any religious beliefs. I'm glad to argue why I think my religious beliefs are correct, but I accept that I cannot prove my religious beliefs to you and that you are entirely free to tell me that my beliefs are full of shit. I'll argue for my position on a universal moral position, but that is something I think I can, and have, made a logical, non-religious argument for. Like Sparrow, you're free to disagree with me, but I haven't heard an argument that persuades me I'm wrong.

At the risk of wandering into an entirely different topic, I'm very willing to argue that homosexuality and Christianity are morally compatible. Rather than producing a 10-page essay on the subject (which I did when I debated my conservative Lutheran pastor father on this issue), I'll just tackle the specific point you raised. Leviticus does indeed say that homosexual sex is an "abomination" or "detestable" (strictly speaking, it says that it is an abomination "to lie with a man in the bed of a woman", which is linguistically understood to be a reference to homo-sex, but could theoretically mean that homo-sex is only wrong if you do it in a woman's bed), but the word translated as 'abomination' is 'toevah'. When something is 'toevah', it is ritually unclear; it renders a Jew unable to make sacrifices or participate in worship. In additional to homo-sex, eating shellfish or insects, improperly shaving one's beard, having sex with a menstruating woman, and improperly making sacrifices are all toevah offenses. So butt sex makes me unclean, but fortunately for a Christian, being unclean isn't an issue anymore, since we believe that Christ was the final and completing sacrifice. Toevah offenses are contrasted to zima offenses, which are things that are declared inherently immoral. So being an abomination is not a moral quality at all, but a ritual state that doesn't apply to Christians.

Sparrow69 · Feb 1, 2010

I can see this topic going dangerously off topic, and I'm partially to blame here. Sorry to the Original poster "Odd1" for the thread hijacking. Lets now return to the topic at hand before this turns into a highly controversial religious debate.

Obedient Little Puppy · Feb 1, 2010

Hmm, good idea...that arguing was starting to get a bit much

Horses? No way. How the hell would it fit, for one thing? And as IF said at the beginning, horses can be extremely unpredictable, sometimes dangerously so

Not that I'm saying that I would consider it if not for these issues, because I wouldn't. The thought of sex with a real animal is nauseating to me. When my master and I play our Puppy and Pussy games, there is no sexual interaction whatsoever.

Well, that's not strictly true; once as Puppy, he gave me a fingering on the grounds of seeing if his pet was ready to be 'mated' yet, and when I dressed as Pussy once, he decided to give me an 'examination' in the guise of a vet. But, these things aside, there has been nothing sexual played out in these roles. It just doesn't seem right, somehow, I don't think

sebastian · Feb 1, 2010

Although, as I've said, I think actual bestiality is immoral, and it's something I have zero desire to do, I find puppy play quite arousing, and love using the pup sexually. I have no idea how I can find the actual thing revolting but the fake thing arousing, but I do.

kittengrey · Feb 2, 2010

Sub4Life said:
I'm a Christian also, Sebastian, and grew up in a strongly Catholic family, and am still very much influenced by my religion, and I do think there is a code of right and wrong. I think it is everyones right to be able to disagree with me, and tell me I am wrong. That is there beleif.

And to Kittengrey, there most certainly is wrong. Murdering, raping, stealing. That's wrong. I can see circumstances when stealing is neccesary (in a third world country. In places like britain, America, Germany, so on, I dont think there is a good reason to steal, there are other options)

And if someone is coming at you with a knife, you should be able to defend yourself even if that means killing them.

But I dont see how things like beating a child, raping someone, child or adult, murdering in cold blood, betraying someone, ect. can not be classified as wrong.

I know people want to be different and say it doesnt matter what society says, and in some cases it doesnt, but murder? I have to agree with society on that one. Rape. Slavery. I'd put that in the definite "wrong" catagory.

You see it as "wrong" but the people doing it don't see it as such. Since there is nothing we all can call 'wrong', then there is no true wrong. True, Society is the mass majority, but its not the all.

But as Sparrow said, back on topic. As for the horse fitting OLP, you can stretch yourself big enough, it just takes a hella lot of time.
Master doesn't call my puppy play by that term anymore, since its more of a role then a game, so he just calls it 'dog time'. Basically, I am a dog. Period. No human things unless I need to go to the bathroom or something important like that. But, during dog time, Im also his 'bitch in heat' that he can use whenever he wants. And since I'm a dog, I can't complain. Of course, who said I would be complaining......

Sparrow69 · Feb 2, 2010

as far as stretching and fitting goes.... I'm surprised so many think it would be an issue.... Bare in mind, that even though a horse's cock is big, a baby is bigger by a long shot.

Women and horses?

Sub4Life

Member

Sparrow69

Moderator

InnocentFacade

Member

Sub4Life

Member

sebastian

Active Member

Sparrow69

Moderator

Obedient Little Puppy

Moderator

sebastian

Active Member

kittengrey

Member

Sparrow69

Moderator

Similar threads