# Biblical literalists: why is sucking a penis a sin, but sucking a lollipop isn't? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 3, 2003, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-literalists-why-is-sucking-a-penis-a-sin-but-sucking-a-lollipop-isnt/146505 "2003-01-03T22:47:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2003, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-literalists-why-is-sucking-a-penis-a-sin-but-sucking-a-lollipop-isnt/146505/141 "2003-01-09T02:26:11Z")
IANABL, **Lib** , but I would say that _some_ fundamentalists/literalists believe that the sinfulness of ALL “unnatural” sex _, even heterosexual,_ is directly biblical – **mistakenly**. Many of them _think_ that this is obviously what the biblical passages meant – but since the Bible doesn’t say “yea, and the men of Sodom did grope each other’s loins, and took to their knees to suck at the youths’ manhood as a calf to the cow’s udder”, it took a _teacher_ or preacher (or social opinion) to explain what was it that was so wicked. So your OP may be seen as posing to _those BL’s who may believe this_ the idea that it’s really an interpretation, that theologians and scriptural scholars have given to such things as the stories of of Onan and Sodom and Paul’s admonishments about “fornication”, and not a self-evident biblical precept. (BTW – Catholicism is the biggest denomination that officially frowns on ALL “unnatural” and ALL non-marital sex, and that frowns the hardest – but since they are not literalists nor do they claim “sola scriptura” as the source of doctrine, they don’t have the same issue) ---
**Author:** ![Mia\_Sweetie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d2c977/32.png) [@Mia\_Sweetie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mia_Sweetie)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2003, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-literalists-why-is-sucking-a-penis-a-sin-but-sucking-a-lollipop-isnt/146505/142 "2003-01-09T03:32:55Z")
In Louisiana, there is a law more than 100 yrs. old where it is a felony " Crime Against Nature" to have any position but missionary. Hmmmmmm we also have a 3 strike you’re out law. Sigh I admit it ! Check my pic on the post office walls. I am a know felon. A sexual deviant. “Your honor I humbly throw myself on the mercy of the court and admit I adore suckers” Thats my story and I’m sticking to it… Sentence: Life with out Tootsie Pops… Or would that be without Penises? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2003, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-literalists-why-is-sucking-a-penis-a-sin-but-sucking-a-lollipop-isnt/146505/143 "2003-01-09T18:59:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Arnold Winkelried \* > \*\*By the way, what do you need another poster for? Didn’t you use logical deduction yourself, in one of your posts above, to show why a Biblical literalist should oppose fellatio? I don’t understand the point. Are you trying to convince a Biblical literalist that he should think fellatio is sinful, so that once he believes it, you can show him that he’s wrong? 😕 \*\* No, you misunderstood. It was not a deontic tableau. I was proving that he _does_ oppose fellatio, not that he _ought_ to. Those are two different conclusions that require two different modes of logic to address. > [@](#): > > I don’t see why a Biblical literalist would need to “prove” God’s rules by using logical deduction. > God says “don’t do X” so I don’t do X because God said so. The ways of God are mysterious etc… No one needs to prove anything to anyone. To say this yet another time, I want to hear what logical argument someone might make that certain acts are sinful. Such an argument will begin with a premise about God and end with a premise about sin. No one needs or is obligated. I am soliciting interested volunteers. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2003, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-literalists-why-is-sucking-a-penis-a-sin-but-sucking-a-lollipop-isnt/146505/144 "2003-01-09T19:02:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JRDelirious \* > \*\*IANABL, **Lib** , but I would say that _some_ fundamentalists/literalists believe that the sinfulness of ALL “unnatural” sex _, even heterosexual,_ is directly biblical – **mistakenly**. Many of them _think_ that this is obviously what the biblical passages meant – but since the Bible doesn’t say “yea, and the men of Sodom did grope each other’s loins, and took to their knees to suck at the youths’ manhood as a calf to the cow’s udder”, it took a _teacher_ or preacher (or social opinion) to explain what was it that was so wicked. > > So your OP may be seen as posing to _those BL’s who may believe this_ the idea that it’s really an interpretation, that theologians and scriptural scholars have given to such things as the stories of of Onan and Sodom and Paul’s admonishments about “fornication”, and not a self-evident biblical precept. > > (BTW – Catholicism is the biggest denomination that officially frowns on ALL “unnatural” and ALL non-marital sex, and that frowns the hardest – but since they are not literalists nor do they claim “sola scriptura” as the source of doctrine, they don’t have the same issue) \*\* I agree with you that all such conclusions are interpretations. Like the Trinity, they have to be. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2003, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-literalists-why-is-sucking-a-penis-a-sin-but-sucking-a-lollipop-isnt/146505/145 "2003-01-09T19:11:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by furt \* > \*\*Lib > > – I am the son, brother and nephew of Southern Baptist ministers. > – I attended two different Bible Colleges and graduated one, Moody, which is a flagship of conservative, “literalist” Christianity. > – I was on staff with Campus Crusade for Christ. > > I’m not sure I fit the category anymore, but I’m pretty well familiar with American Fundamentalism, and I have never, _ever_ heard anyone say anything bad about fellatio, or anal for that matter, among married couples. \*\* I intend to reformulate the debate to pinpoint, most likely, homosexual sex. I’d like to hear a logical argument proving it as sinful (i.e., against God’s will) if such an argument exists. ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2003, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-literalists-why-is-sucking-a-penis-a-sin-but-sucking-a-lollipop-isnt/146505/146 "2003-01-09T22:12:02Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Libertarian \* > I was proving that he _does_ oppose fellatio, not that he _ought_ to. If you are referring to your post above, then I have to admit that I think your proof is lacking in Definition 2 (as Joe\_Cool said): AFAIK the Bible doesn’t mention the existence of a succubus. I think your “impressive conservative Christian resource” made a mistake on that count. I’m not too impressed by this resource myself. (In addition I could point to the conservative Christians in this thread saying that they do _not_ oppose fellatio.) Quick aside - you asked «Where in the Bible is any mention of a “Trinity”?» I was taught that this was stated in Matthew 28:19 - “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” You then asked «Where in the Bible does Jesus say, “I am God”?» I was taught that this was concluded (in part) from these verses - Matthew 16:16 “And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” and John 10:30 “I and my Father are one.” > [@](#): > > I want to hear what logical argument someone might make that certain acts are sinful. I would be interested in reading that also, if you can find anyone to make the argument. I doubt you will. ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2003, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-literalists-why-is-sucking-a-penis-a-sin-but-sucking-a-lollipop-isnt/146505/147 "2003-01-09T22:14:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Lilairen \* > One might think it, but my experience is that most people, even people with large businesses or organisations, couldn’t webdesign their way out of a wet paper bag. Lilairen - let me guess, you are a web designer and that’s your company’s slogan? 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2003, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-literalists-why-is-sucking-a-penis-a-sin-but-sucking-a-lollipop-isnt/146505/148 "2003-01-09T22:24:01Z")
Arnold wrote: > [@](#): > > Quick aside - you asked «Where in the Bible is any mention of a “Trinity”?» I was taught that this was stated in Matthew 28:19 - “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” But what in that passage says that they are one and the same, i.e., triune. You could as reasonably argue that Jesus was a polytheist. > [@](#): > > You then asked «Where in the Bible does Jesus say, “I am God”?» I was taught that this was concluded (in part) from these verses - Matthew 16:16 “And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” and John 10:30 “I and my Father are one.” Me too. That’s how I conclude it. But my son is not me, and my wife and I are one. In other words, it seems to me that the so-called the literalists are doing the same thing that you say the Catholics are doing (and are therefore not literalists) — extrapolating inferences to derive such things the Trinity and the divinity of Christ. My belief is that the same sort of inferences may be reasonably taken from scripture to conclude that, say, homosexual acts are not in and of themselves sinful. ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2003, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-literalists-why-is-sucking-a-penis-a-sin-but-sucking-a-lollipop-isnt/146505/149 "2003-01-09T22:46:11Z")
Well Libertarian, in a logical debate concerning the meaning of the Bible, I would consider myself woefully unprepared. So I think at this point I’ve said everything I have to say. Thank you for your patience in dealing with my digressions. I hope you can actually find the debate that you were interested in. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2003, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-literalists-why-is-sucking-a-penis-a-sin-but-sucking-a-lollipop-isnt/146505/150 "2003-01-09T22:57:21Z")
Thank you, Arnold. Actually, I’m not sure how patient I was. In retrospect, I think that I was testy. And I apologize for that. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2003, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-literalists-why-is-sucking-a-penis-a-sin-but-sucking-a-lollipop-isnt/146505/151 "2003-01-09T23:02:58Z")
Incidentally, do the board a favor and close this thread if you would. 😉 Thanks. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [January 10, 2003, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-literalists-why-is-sucking-a-penis-a-sin-but-sucking-a-lollipop-isnt/146505/152 "2003-01-10T19:19:16Z")
All right then. You were testy but then I was being bullheaded. So we’re even. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/biblical-literalists-why-is-sucking-a-penis-a-sin-but-sucking-a-lollipop-isnt/146505.md?page=7)