X
-
I really hate it when Christians turn a blind eye towards certain topics and look only at their scriptures and/or traditions, especially when it comes to science. Anyway, the answer is obviously no. DNA doesn't care about monogamy and is probably polyamorous in principle. The sex drive in our brains has been given to us by our DNA in order to spread it to future generations.
Part of the problem is that once we step outside of sex between a married man and woman as the norm, we open the door to everything else.
I agree that TV sex is mostly nonsense. However, I would also argue that it does no harm if unmarried, responsible people have sex for fun."Concentrate on what you have to do. Fix your eyes on it. Remind yourself that your task is to be a good human being; remind yourself what nature demands of people. Then do it, without hesitation, and speak the truth as you see it. But with kindness. With humility. Without hypocrisy."
-Marcus Aurelius
-
Originally posted by T-Shirt Ninja View PostI really hate it when Christians turn a blind eye towards certain topics and look only at their scriptures and/or traditions, especially when it comes to science. Anyway, the answer is obviously no. DNA doesn't care about monogamy and is probably polyamorous in principle. The sex drive in our brains has been given to us by our DNA in order to spread it to future generations.
This isn't true. Secular communities talk about sexual morality quite a lot, and no one suggests to just open up the door to everything else. It's a slippery slope fallacy. Non-monogamy is only a problem for Christians in the West.
I agree that TV sex is mostly nonsense. However, I would also argue that it does no harm if unmarried, responsible people have sex for fun.
I also though question the idea that it's just harmless fun. It's quite amusing to hear we Christians are usually the ones that have a negative view of sex when we are the ones that view it as sacred and intimate and the secular position seems to just be "A good time was had by all."
Comment
-
I am not entirely certain if I am permitted to post to this board, so if I am transgressing site rules perhaps someone can let me know.
I suspect that biology and culture are being conflated. There is no biological reason why men should not spread their genes as widely as possible. We see such behaviours in various other higher mammals.
However, cultural mores are something rather different. The need to ensure that progeny are biologically the issue of the father has a deep rooted cultural history that is often [but not necessarily] connected with concerns over inheritance and familial recognition.
The comment about Jesus' unmarried state is interesting, it would certainly be somewhat unusual for a Jewish man not to be married. In Judaism the married state and children are seen as a blessing and there is often a degree of sadness and/or pity expressed towards those who are unmarried and/or childless. We see this latter state evidenced in various Hebrew texts.
However, if, as has been suggested, Jesus and his brother James had connections with the Essenes, then it is possible that, at least for a period of his life, Jesus may have been celibate and unmarried."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Apologiaphoenix, 05-16-2024, 06:19 PM
|
0 responses
17 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 05-16-2024, 06:19 PM | ||
Started by Apologiaphoenix, 05-06-2024, 04:30 PM
|
10 responses
64 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by JimL
05-11-2024, 07:46 AM
|
||
Started by Apologiaphoenix, 05-01-2024, 09:43 PM
|
6 responses
75 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 05-17-2024, 10:31 PM | ||
Started by Apologiaphoenix, 04-25-2024, 09:42 AM
|
0 responses
11 views
1 like
|
Last Post 04-25-2024, 09:42 AM | ||
Started by Apologiaphoenix, 04-09-2024, 09:39 AM
|
28 responses
208 views
1 like
|
Last Post 04-30-2024, 09:42 AM |
Comment