tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post5622213691384452979..comments2024-03-28T08:41:39.614-07:00Comments on Winging It: While We're on the SubjectStanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04523232247971115247noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-5786539767988329952012-06-20T14:55:09.272-07:002012-06-20T14:55:09.272-07:00great post Stangreat post StanThe Schaubing Blogkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12811910033353720626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-787216343839171412012-06-17T09:20:17.523-07:002012-06-17T09:20:17.523-07:00Great post, Stan. I've tried to state that exa...Great post, Stan. I've tried to state that exact point several times before, but have not been able to put it so eloquently.<br />Thanks.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10958013753009875759noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-35131248540551410072012-06-17T08:54:18.242-07:002012-06-17T08:54:18.242-07:00Grundy, since I obviously draw my morality from th...Grundy, since I obviously draw my morality from the Bible and the Bible is not unclear on the topic, that would be a given. Sex is for marriage only.Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04523232247971115247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-54442143325932224962012-06-16T18:18:03.914-07:002012-06-16T18:18:03.914-07:00Stan, do you think that people shouldn't have ...Stan, do you think that people shouldn't have sex until they are married?Grundyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07339125862340793733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-85267422402858443622012-06-16T17:39:16.892-07:002012-06-16T17:39:16.892-07:00Quite true. A heterosexual marriage based on perso...Quite true. A heterosexual marriage based on personal urges won't work either.Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04523232247971115247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-44881770643687551602012-06-16T12:25:30.983-07:002012-06-16T12:25:30.983-07:00Another great post, Stan. I have tried to make th...Another great post, Stan. I have tried to make the same distinction myself in blogs past. Basing unions, marriages, whatever, on lust is not a good basis at all and too many hetero marriages are so based. Eventually, when those desires wane, so does the desire to remain married. <br /><br />What passes for "love" where lust is involved is deceitful in that one disregards or is unable to recognize the truth of the other because lust is so powerful. Therefor, it is NOT love at all and certainly not the love required for a healthy and life-long marriage. <br /><br />It is not possible to maintain that type of lust based love as it is superficial in nature though some claim to still be hot for their spouses many years into their marriages. I don't believe it is quite the same as lust, or, the true knowledge of their spouses has led them something else that now arouses their lust (though it might still be something other than lust).<br /><br />Why must we promise or vow to love the other if lust is lasting? We promise to love the other for life because lust ISN'T lasting. Love is something we are supposed to <i>do</i> as opposed to something over which we have no control or say.<br /><br />Therefor, to make such a promise to one who does not fit God's plan for human sexuality is irrational.Marshal Arthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01054268632726520871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-59728576305450501672012-06-16T12:07:08.571-07:002012-06-16T12:07:08.571-07:00I'm missing the point of the question, Grundy....I'm missing the point of the question, Grundy. Would I be sexually intimate with someone of the same sex? Why? Why would I? But what I really suspect is that you're missing the point, and that wouldn't be unexpected if you haven't been following the discussion here.<br /><br />Marriage has a meaning. It is a concept with history, tradition, purpose. Even those who are arguing for "marriage equity" and trying to make "gay marriage" legal admit that the first requirement is that the longstanding, traditional definition of marriage must change in order to make "gay marriage" a meaningful phrase. Marriage is -- has <i>always</i> been -- the union of a man and a woman with one key purpose of reproducing and rearing children.<br /><br />Now, <i>I</i> suggest we don't change that, that losing that concept will be too expensive and, ultimately, remove any genuine meaning to marriage. <i>They</i> say, "But you're preventing us from getting married!" No, I'm not. Thus the point of the post.<br /><br />Why would I recommend a person sexually attracted to the same gender be sexually intimate with someone of the opposite gender? Because they want to <i>get married</i> and this is their opportunity. Why would you suggest I be sexually intimate with someone of the <i>same</i> sex? No reason. No reason at all. Except to <i>affirm</i> my fears that the only viable point in life is to follow my own personal desires wherever they lead. A dangerous position to take.Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04523232247971115247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-426878790226529602012-06-16T11:52:07.550-07:002012-06-16T11:52:07.550-07:00So...would you be sexually intimate with someone o...So...would you be sexually intimate with someone of the same sex?Grundyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07339125862340793733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-90226280759045985572012-06-16T08:37:38.955-07:002012-06-16T08:37:38.955-07:00I think that can be simply answered by looking at ...I think that can be simply answered by looking at the most recent Pepsi slogan..."Live For Now".Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08443810898475961105noreply@blogger.com