|
First this made me gag, then it made me laugh. A two for one...
And not only that, it's a crock of shit ritual that don't mean a goddamned thing...or maybe that's just me talking shit after a couple glasses of wine. Purity is so overrated. |
Quote:
|
Sex is in the eye of the beholder (owe, my eye!).
Some people consider it the end of all spirituality, some consider it a great raunchy way to spend a Saturday night. It's just like anything in life, you have to discover it's meaning to you. |
Quote:
What I find creepy are some of the responses in this thread. I wonder how many actually have children??? Its easy to judge when you have no frame of reference. |
and you know mixed, i think i like you more and more as time goes by.
dave: which "groups" are you talking about? some den of unwashed acid-dropping turtle-fucking profligates and whores? i don't know, i'm down in the middle of the bible belt, and i've run across my share of just-out-of-highschool-singing-in-the-choir girls, daddy is a deacon, mommy plays the organ....and she's dropping adderol and taking on group sex. not to mention little old me. i find the ceremonial nature of this creepy, and the passing of oaths, the misogynistic nature, etc. someone wants to raise their kids traditionally, i could give less than a shit. but this is just fucked up. i'd be just as creeped out if some newage hippy group had a ceremony where they celebrated their daughter's first period by having her promise to all respect her sexual nature and to be open minded and sexually exhuberant throughout her life. i don't have any problem with that philosophy either, but you don't need the ceremony, and it certainly doesn't need to seem a mock up of marriage. |
Take your pick of 'groups', there are plenty to go around. As I said before I don't think the oath is a wise practice, but they're not my children either. Plenty of adults take oaths in churches then break them a few years later, so I'd have to say its better to just say yes or no, than take an oath.
|
I'm interested to know which "groups" he's talking about, too.
|
Quote:
|
ok dave: i'll get the ball rolling. how about the boy scouts? they send their kids out in the wilderness for a weekend alone with older men. no cell phones, no contact.
my old church group (methodist youth foundation) used to throw church retreats. the older kids always brought marajuana and alcohol and fucked their brains out at night. the youth brigade for oral sex? |
The names arent important. The point I was trying to get across was that at least Christian Fundamentalists take an ongoing interst in their children while others do not. I may not agree with their methods but I respect them for trying to do the right thing. Wait, I already said that..........guess you missed that.
|
We read it, but you are trying to move attention from the fundamentalists elsewhere to what you've supposed are worse groups. Who are they, and how are they worse? I'm sure you'd be at least inquisitive if I were to take attention away from an atheist group by making a vague statement about Christian 'groups' without any evidence.
|
Quote:
I don't think that anyone here has criticized the basic idea of parental interest inherent in this kind of ceremony. What I think people are being critical of is the trappings of the ceremony itself and is something that DaveMatrix has already conceded is problematic. As far as the "other groups" comment, I ask DaveMatrix as well as everyone else to please point out a large group complete free the possibility of teen pregnancy and/or drug addiction. In my mind such a thing doesn't exist, especially since results vary from child to child in individual families. In other words, your results may vary. |
no, you're talking about theoretical constructs. my opinion. i would wager these "people" are like any other "group." some of them take an ongoing interest in the their kids...but some of them do this ceremony for show, some of them do it to fit in with their friends, some of them do it because they are depressed and need this kind of shit to fill their lives, some of them do it to fit into their social groups. just like any other group. they're people.
|
Quote:
Most people wouldn't home school their children, they're more than happy to get them out of the house for 8 hours a day. The FC's are more than happy to spend as much time as necessary to raise their children according to their beliefs. I personally don't think this makes for a very well rounded individual. They lead a secluded life, then are thrust into the real world as adults. Once again, they're not my children though..... How many of you actually have children??? |
dave,
based only on what i know about the posters here, and looking back at this thread, i would conservatively put it at about a 50/50 mix of those with children, and those without. i know will, jazz, mixed, bor, charlatan and i think kurty are parents. |
Quote:
I think the problem we've been discussing is that the "right thing" is so badly warped it's worse. |
I have three children. All girls. 20, 18 and 8.
I'll be happy to answer any questions about their habits and upbringing. :) |
Quote:
|
I have two kids. A 19 year old daughter, and a 4 year old son.
I, also, will be happy to answer any questions about their habits and upbringing. :) |
This isnt 20 questions, its a message board. If you have an opinion then please state it.
|
I guess the question would be, would I rather have uninvolved parents, or parents who try to control my libido? The former, please.
|
A.) I'm perfectly aware that this is a message board. I help to moderate it.
B.) I believe, unless I'm very much mistaken, that I have voiced my opinion. C.) I'm responding to a question that you asked. Twice, as a matter of fact. |
Quote:
You've made a bold statement here: that some nameless groups whose only defining characteristic seems to be that they aren't Fundamentalist Christians allow their children to basically ruin their own lives. We've asked which groups your referring to; you've refused, saying it's irrelevant. I'll accept that answer at face value and move on. As far as the misinterpretation of this message goes, I think you should understand how easy it was to make, especially with how you phrased it originally. Again, you're using very broad brush strokes to paint what could be very large groups of people so it's difficult for anyone to tell what you're actually talking about since you're not willing to define your terms. I happen to agree that some of the fundamentalists are doing what they think is the right thing, but I have to wonder why they think including all of these creepy marriage metaphors is necessary. I also think that other fundamentalists involved in this movement may have ulterior motives. Not necessarily nefarrious ulterior motives, though. |
D) BOR has a really hot avatar. Seriously, it's almost distracting.
Wait a second. The blanket statement was made, we asked for clarification, then you said we misunderstood you? That's why we were asking for clarification, which you still haven't provided. |
Quote:
I swear to god (sic), it seems that best anyone can do anymore to defend something extreme is to bring up the other extreme. Doesn't make for very compelling arguments. note: this is not directed at willravel...just bouncing off his post. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
To provide an adequate defense to this ritual, I think one needs more than just, "well, it's better than letting your kids run wild, snort heroin and get knocked up at 14!" Although, to be fair, a few others on this thread have done more than that. Guess, I'm just jibin' DaveMatrix a little bit. Hi, Dave :wave: Especially, since he seems to be playing the devil's advocate here and not particularly in support of the ritual. |
As I've said before, I wonder how people can judge others when they have no frame of reference, thus the question about children. So great, you have children, a frame of reference and you aren't going by on your own childhood to argue a point, that you know nothing about.
I'm not sure exactly whay you want, stats on teen preganancy or drug abuse??? The net is full of stats, feel free. You want the name of a group that has these problems??? They all do...whats your point??? |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
So, there are no specific "groups" that let their children run wild, explore their sexuality, experiment with drugs. It's isolated to an "individual" family choice.
Right? Look...I applaud the fundamentalist evangelical (whatever label you want to attach) Christian's active approach in the upbringing of their children. It's to be commended. I do, however, find the methodology of it to be a little...distubing, at best. |
Quote:
|
Well, I don't claim it is pedophilic, but it is attempted patriarchal domination of the vagina. Definitively.
|
You are completely entitled to your opinion and I can understand how you could view that as such. I will have to agree to disagree on this one.
I may be predisposed to argue the virtues of constraint when teenagers are involved. A dear friend of mine has a 20 year old daughter who is soon to be giving birth to her second child. This baby is underweight for its age, and will soon be delivered caesarean because the first child was. I know the mother has experimented with numerous drugs and has no maternal instinct because of her drug use. She was spoiled as a child, given everything she wanted, never worked a day in her life, and mommy paid her way, and still is, for everything. The father of the first child is a bum, wont work or support the child in any way. He's black, she's white, which will only make things harder on the child, because the father is absolutely positive that all white people are satan, and has convinced the mother that this is so (although she is white, strange huh???)Both of her parents worked and spent little time with her, and I suppose that phsycologically speaking she is looking for some type of male acceptance or love, which she never received from her father. She doesn't even know who the father of the baby is, it could be one of many. Sorry for the rant, it may help you understand my position.......or not. Oh well, at least I tried to explain. Sorry for the syntax and other errors, I'm not much on proof reading. |
I don't think anyone here is against advocating constraint of teenage sexuality per se. I think most here would agree that education and communication are much better tools than a "purity ceremony".
I can even agree that these people, as misguided as I believe them to be in their execution, think they are doing the right thing by their daughters. To strip it down to its essence this is abstinence vs. education. In my mind, abstinence is an unreasonable goal when you are dealing with teenagers. Education and communication are the key (depending on your point of view that educational component can also include a big dose of, "having sex before age 'X' is a bad idea). Two more points: 1) The key, as always, is balance. Too much control of kids is just as bad as too little. Both ways lead to rebelliousness. 2) The subtext of my belief in education and communication is involvement and interaction with my kids. It may be suggested that one needs to home school and spend every waking minute with your kids, but I would argue there is more than one way to raise a kid. |
1,400 purity balls....
Its not like this is sweeping the nation. Furthermore, at age 11 most girls (especially in conservative homes) still think boys have cooties, so of course they won't mind going to a ball and promising they will never have sex.. after at that age sex is gross. I wonder how many of the dads keep their side of the deal. |
What a great way to allow people to practice breaking vows!
If they can break them at such a young age it makes marriage vows so much easier to ignore! (The comments above were strictly facetious and not meant to offend, please laugh heartily and smile.) |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:58 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project