Why do the Christians always hate sex so much?

[TaraJo]

The World Health Org says breast milk is best.

Yeah, the Jesus people could stand to learn from them. The world health organization says breast milk is best but you don't see them trying to go out there and outlaw formula.

Also, if you're judging overall parental ability on the ability to lactate, that would pretty much make lesbians the ultimate parents, right?

[Faith No More]

I wonder what the World Health Org says about praying.

[Justtristo]

The Old Testament has a fairly positive view of human sexuality and the Song of Songs especially celebrates sex. Only incest, bestiality and probably male homosexual relations are forbidden in the Old Testament.

However the New Testament because it was written in part by Gnostics (who tended to be anti-sex), has a very negative view of humanity sexuality. Indeed there is a celibacy gospel which is proclaimed in the New Testament, which states that a celibate life is a ideal for Christians to emulate.

Roman Catholic theologians over the centuries used this celibacy gospel to justify mandatory celibacy for the clergy. Not to mention interpreted the New and Old Testaments in a way to state that abortion and indeed any sex (especially masturbation) apart from married couples trying to conceive was immoral.

[Violet]

Read all 8 pages, still don't know what the fuck this thread is about

I like to think that Christians are generally more awkward and unrealistic about sex than they 'hate' it. If Christians hated sex, they probably wouldn't breed so well

@ the lactating breasts split:

[pocaracas]

Read all 8 pages, still don't know what the fuck this thread is about

I like to think that Christians are generally more awkward and unrealistic about sex than they 'hate' it. If Christians hated sex, they probably wouldn't breed so well

They like it as much as everyone else, but they're only "allowed" to do it for procreating reasons.... sooo.....breeding a lot becomes inevitable.

[festive1]

Since you're so progressive and open-minded about sex (unlike those religious prudes,) wanna hear the pedophile's argument?
...look, they are enjoying it. (Same argument applies to beastiality)
...we pay them money
...opposing underage sex is a bigoted, prudish, old-fashioned attitude.
...nobody is physically harmed (Victimless crime)
...we have their parents permission
...when they grow up they will wonder what all the fuss was about. They will be more open minded about sex - unlike all those Christians who hate sex.

An abuser might get the "consent" of abusive or neglectful parents to allow sexual relations between their children and an adult, but they don't have the consent of the child. By legal definition a child is not able to give consent until said child has reached the age of consent which differs amongst the various jurisdictions. To suggest that the victim enjoys the sexual contact is akin to saying rape victims who achieve orgasm during a rape must have truly wanted to be raped in the first place. In actuality, the physiological process involved in orgasm can be triggered even when the abuse victim does not want the sexual contact. Indeed, this often leads to sense of betrayal by one's own body for the victim and much psychological trauma.
Most abusers do not pay or in any other way compensate their victims of child sexual abuse. Ask a 5 year old rape victim if they were not physically harmed by forced penetration. Indeed, there have been reported cases of infants as young as 3 months of age that were suffering from various STDs from sexual abuse. An infant is incapable of giving any form of consent. Not to mention that the worst scars of child sexual abuse are often not physical ones. Survivors of childhood sexual abuse often suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, depression, a low sense of self-esteem or self worth. To suggest that the scars of abuse are only physical is to discount basic psychology.
So that's the pedophile's argument debunked, am I right?

[Anomalocaris]

Because their god boy Jesus probably never got any.

Perhaps he was gay??

I have no doubt he had very strong outward homosexual inclinations. But I don't think simply being a homosexual in the repressive environment could explain the hoste of pathological behaviors later christianity attempt to cast in some divine light. I think there are also some very deep pschological issues with women and heterosexuality, starting with his mother, in that catastrophic wreck of a man.

I wouldn't be surprised if some incestous relationship with his mother, transmitted through imaginative dissemblings by himself, his immediate followers, and the subsequent wishthinking idiots, lays at the real origin of some of the most strained christian notion of the father and son being one.

[Cato]

OK. I'd rather argue the easier proposition of Adam and Eve as equal helpmates to each other but if you insist. How would you like to frame the debate topic? (If did you just wanna slug it out back and forth here?)

Premise. God left His best creative work of art till last.


And the man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. (Genesis 2:18)

Now. That statement, that God could not find anyone good enough to keep Adam company for life, came AFTER God had already declared all of Creation very good.

God saw all that he had made, and it was very good (Genesis 1:31)

Which means that nothing already created was good enough. So God went one better.

That's it? The bible indicates that a woman came second and you say he saved the best for last? Your other ammunition consists of god having to create Eve after Adam refused to fuck the beasts of the field (you are aware that god offered the animals to Adam for a helpmeet before he created Eve right?)?

As you read the following, please consider that it's perfectly acceptable to conclude that the Bible is bullshit rather than trying to defend its contents.

“No wickedness comes anywhere near the wickedness of a woman…..Sin began with a woman and thanks to her we all must die” (Ecclesiasticus 25:19,24).

“A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I don’t permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner” (I Timothy 2:11-14).

“The birth of a daughter is a loss” (Ecclesiasticus 22:3).

“Keep a headstrong daughter under firm control, or she will abuse any indulgence she receives. Keep a strict watch on her shameless eye, do not be surprised if she disgraces you” (Ecclesiasticus 26:10-11).

“As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.” (I Corinthians 14:34-35)

“When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening. Anything she lies on during her period will be unclean, and anything she sits on will be unclean. Whoever touches her bed must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening. Whoever touches anything she sits on must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening. Whether it is the bed or anything she was sitting on, when anyone touches it, he will be unclean till evening” (Lev. 15:19-23).

“If a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her saying, ‘I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,’ …and no proof of the girl’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of the town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.” (Deut 22:13-21)

“A bad wife brings humiliation, downcast looks, and a wounded heart. Slack of hand and weak of knee is the man whose wife fails to make him happy. Woman is the origin of sin, and it is through her that we all die. Do not leave a leaky cistern to drip or allow a bad wife to say what she likes. If she does not accept your control, divorce her and send her away” (Ecclesiasticus 25:25).

“Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God…A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head” (I Corinthians 11:3-10).

“They called out to Lot and said, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Send them out to us so we can have sex with them! Lot went out to them at the entrance and shut the door behind him. He said, “Don’t do this evil, my brothers. Look, I’ve got two daughters who haven’t had sexual relations with a man. I’ll bring them out to you, and you can do whatever you want to them. However, don’t do anything to these men, because they have come under the protection of my roof.” (Genesis 19:5-8)

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

Um, Ecclesiasticus is a non-canonical book.

[Cato]

Um, Ecclesiasticus is a non-canonical book.

Many Catholics will disagree with you. It was also in the Septuagint.