Yeah, see, that’s his job. He gets paid zero dollars an hour to follow around people telling them to post the link so everybody else knows what’s going on, and to take crap from self-righteous weirdos who think we need to be protected from medical information.
Also, christianphobic is not a word. It will also never be a word because it’s impossible to say. English doesn’t like the -nf- sound in the middle of it; the ‘f’ sound doesn’t play well with other consonants in general.
Christianophobic might work, but still sounds awkward.
Oh, goodness gracious, I have been fulfilling my obligation for smut to be shocked at using Usenet, not the Web! Should I start a splinter church or must I repent? If I do have to repent, can anyone suggest sites that will outline good repentence techniques?
McKenna, I know you probably enjoy taunting someone who has morals that don’t make sense to you, but I must ask one thing: If you have enough inteligence to realize that pornography is OK why do you even bother picking on someone who doesn’t? Why don’t you “fight ignorance” (which is the purpose of this Message Board) and show your misguided human the errors of his way? Why must you hide behind foolish teasing (and numbers, since I and only I agree with Righteous) and show some sort of evidence for pornography?
I must say, pointless ridicule does not become fighting ignorance.
If your point can be made without words, what’s the point of making it at all?
And Righetous: “i don’t think i’m doing wrong in representing the christian view.”
Well, shucks. Here I am all Christian and everything. Your views are not mine here, my friend. There is a line (not even all that fine) between pornography and education.
And if you think the article on penis pumps was porno, don’t even TOUCH the one on the caloric content of sperm.
So you’re the only person who agrees with Righteous? That’s very interesting. I think I have some friends at the CF board who, sadly enough, would most likely agree with you.
I must say . . . subtle insults do not become a man who is trying act in a Christian manner.
First, let me say I am not following what you mean by JDT. I also can’t imagine a decent reason for mocking anyone regardless of what that abbreviation stands for.
Probably true, but those people aren’t participating in this conversation now are they? In essence, I am the only one who agrees with Righteous, but I’m guessing you were smart enough to understand what I wrote when you first read it and are just being picky.
I didn’t insult anyone. Please show me where I did. I defended a person who was being insulted. That is a Christ like character. However, calling people names because you don’t agree with them is not an Ignorance Fighting charater.
JDT is a guy who claims all circumcision is mutilation and amputation and cutting off half a guy’s penis and all sorts of conspiracies are behind it and the wars of the 20th century are to blame, among other things.
We mock him because we think it’s funny how closed-minded he is and how unsupported his ideas are . . . especially since he was in GD with them. And he refuses to believe su but we mstu believe him . . . and isn’t debating properly and thus what he’s saying is really not helping him out.
You said you were the only one who agreed with Righteous. Maybe here, but there are others, as I said. I thought you were trying to set yourself and Righteous as martyrs or something similar, or fighting for The Cause against The Man or something equally outlandish.
“I must say, pointless ridicule does not become fighting ignorance.” That’s what I found to be subtlely insulting. Maybe I just read into it the wrong way.
And I don’t think anyone on here is (yet) being deliberately rude to Righteous or you . . . we’ve seen a lot of people come in here with gangbusters thinking they have The Truth. We’ve seen “the truth” many times and we’ve grown quite tired of those who would have us believe they know what is right and wrong, especially considering some of them have been here.
You’ve been here since January . . . Righteous has been here since November. Perhaps you could, over email, enlighten him as to how one goes about doing what he’s unsuccessfully tried to do here at the SDMB? I think it would make for a most enlightening debate. However, neither the Pit nor ATMB nor COCC is the place for it.
Anyway, I actually don’t think pornography is entirely a good thing, I don’t think children should see it, and I will be going to church tomorrow morning, although probably not one you’d like!
But really, if you look for porno on the Net and in society you’re going to find it. I think the best example for Christians to show is to lead a good life by their own lights and let such lives speak for themselves. The soul who seeks a church will find it guided by God, not by some guy who drops into a message board like this and sets everybody’s sarcastic juices (including mine!) flowing.
Anyway, Fenris said Usenet was still unsullied, so therefore I am sinless anyway. Back to alt.sex.hamsters.duct-tape…
After reading up on that super-groovy Ezekiel passage that MEBucker brought up–another friend of mine pointed me to this passage from Samuel 20:41-42
41
And as soon as the lad was gone, David arose out of a place toward the south, and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed himself three times: and they kissed one another, and wept one with another, until David exceeded.
42
And Jonathan said to David, Go in peace, forasmuch as we have sworn both of us in the name of the LORD, saying, The LORD be between me and thee, and between my seed and thy seed for ever. And he arose and departed: and Jonathan went into the city.
Is it just me–or does that just -sound- homoerotic?
jenkinsfan, you’ve admitted you don’t know much, if anything, about JDT. I’d strongly suggest you go back and read some of the threads started/about him before you make assumptions.
Trying to judge others becomes no one, my friend. I realize I’m guilty of doing the same. Doesn’t mean doing it on your part is any better:)
Pointless ridicule, as you call it, also sometimes lightens the mood, which especially in the Pit can get pretty high-strung.
Rude I would see as trying to deliberately offend him, which would be (perhaps immediate) grounds for banning. My take on the OP was that the poster found it humorous and wanted to show Righteous how amusing (if not actually slightly offensive) it seems to some of us to come in here and complain about rules and moderators when he’s not yet been a member for that long of a time.
People who come in and say “this is true. Accept it or you are banished to hell” bother us. People who refuse to examine evidence we give them for things being how they are, or who persist in matters when it is clear to the rest of us that they’re digging themselves in an ever-deepening hole bother us.
If you’re going to say “what if” in GQ or GD, be prepared to back it up with some sort of evidence. Otherwise you lose credibility fast. F A S T.
When he signed on to the sdmb he agreed to play by its rules. Also,
iampuhna-I remember we had to read that passage in the Bible in fifth grade, and my friends and I started giggling about how they were kissing, and I was like, “They’re gay!” (Of course, we were ten, and anything like that would set up off.)
My teacher heard me whisper and said, “NO THEY ARE NOT!” She really got pissed at me…
I tell you this in love, Brother Jenkinsfan, I’ve called no-one any name. I’ve said nothing but positive things about Brother Righteous’s posts.
The only negative comments I’ve made were telling the dark truths about the Nefarious Mr. Winkelreid (he’s also Caliguia and his schemes for world domination were Ian Fleming’s inspiration for Blofeld!). I also called the disbelievers of Brother Righteous’s message Scrofulous Weasels. Perhaps that was strong, but in your heart, you know it’s true: they are Scrofulous Weasels. Denial won’t help.
It’s sad that your heart is so filled with worldly matters that you aren’t able to read a simple post, made with the intent to uplift and enlighten without seeing negativity. I’m sorry to say this, but you need to examine the beam in your own eye, before talking about the mote in mine.
Or is it that my simple, ineloquent way with words aren’t up to the beauty and magnificent grandur of Brother Righteous’s missives. To this, I have to admit my lack. Despite my futile efforts, I fall short of his inspired style. Nonetheless, I seem to have reached a few people with my simple message. As Lena Lamont put it "It makes me feel as though my hard work ain’t been in vain fer nuthin’ ".
Righteous’s initially objected to a Cecil article that discussed surgical procedures, both cosmetic and corrective, for the penis. Now, it was clear to me that the intent of the article was to educate not arouse. I don’t see how this could be construed as pornographic in anyway.
Also, he then states in another thread that he feels on-line medical information should be denied to the general public. In my opinion, this is an incredibly dangerous position to take. People should be allowed to understand their bodies and make informed medical decisions.
Also, his objections are based on his religious beliefs, but he hasn’t explained how he is backed up biblically. I have yet to hear of a passage that says “thou shalt not understand how the body works”.
Perhaps, you can explain why you believe Righteous has the weight of Truth on his side.
Well, I believe you answered the question in your next paragraph.
From my perspective, and probably from Righteous’ perspective as well, many Cecil aritcles are loaded with material presented in an educational manner but with the arousal part implied.
I agree with you here. But at the same time, I seriously doubt anyone reads a Cecil column for medical advise.
The Bible never says for us to remain in ignorance concerning our bodies. It does command us to be modest and decent. If you want Scripture, let me know.
I believe Righteous has the Truth on his side when it comes to pornography, but as I stated above, I’m not for removing all kinds of medical information from off the internet so long as they come from someone with a legitimate practice and a degree in health. Spreading around information otherwise could be dangerous.
Feel free to not look at them. The beautiful part about the SDMB is that we don’t all have to agree. Just don’t go trying to force your moral or religious beliefs on us; that isn’t going to go over too well.
Different strokes for different folks:) Those of us who see no problem with reading articles about penile surgery don’t think it’s immodest or indecent. You do. Good for you:) Feel free not to read it.
The websites most of us use for medical advice are reputable places. When I told you earlier about searching for information for a friend of mine undergoing a medical procedure, I actually went to the website of a medical establishment. As far as we (my friend and I) know, there was nothing either misleading or missing from that site.
As for pornography, God will deal with all of that. You just worry about yourself:) As with all of us, it is a full-time job.
Um, I come here defending one guy who is being taunted and jeered by scores of others: Who is forcing morals on who?
I just wish your “different strokes for different folks” philosophy carried over into posts on the Pit. If it did, then Righteous wouldn’t be the subject of ridicule for his different stroke.
IIRC, you said you were a Chirstian. So, let me point you to Luke 24:47-48, "And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalm. And ye are witnesses of these things.
