Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do you know what the phrase, "preaching to the choir" even means? It would mean that everyone already believes what he's saying. You elaborate to explain how we don't. This comment is contradictory.
It's a choir alright. Just an opposite one. A choir singing to a religious tunes of null. Many of whom seemingly just as intent and equally as vocal (if not more so) on 'saving others' as church goers.
@danielj72, you seem to be very concerned about not only the nature of families raising kids, but the question of the human population and what it means for that to be slowing down. I don't know if this will interest you, but here is a data site about the subject of human population growth:
The human population grew quite slowly until around 1800, and population growth peaked in about the mid-1900s, and the growth RATE has been declining ever since, even though the population has still been growing. We're now around 7.8 billion people. I'm not sure that it's a good thing for our planet that the human population has grown so large, so fast. We make more change and impact to the environment than any other kind of creature, and we're not giving the Earth a whole lot of time to adjust to us. Frankly, I think that hitting the brakes somewhat is a GOOD thing, even if I'm happy that unlike the first 10,000 years or so of our existence we are not really threatened with extinction, except by things that we are doing, or random events we probably can't halt anyways. In other words, a single plague or regional drought isn't likely to destroy our species. That's nice. But we've improved the infant mortality rate in most of the world over the last few hundred years, and increased our lifespans. So frankly, I think that it can be argued from a scientific standpoint, that we don't really have to be reproducing like rabbits.
Of course a man who talks about "sin" may not care about science. If the directive to be fruitful and multiply is more meaningful to you, then there just isn't much that anyone who is not driven by religious doctrine can say to that. I'm at peace with the fact that you believe as you do. I hope that the fact that many do not agree, doesn't cause you too much distress.
“Teen marriages”......another poster putting words in my mouth. More insults against our creator. Everything one needs to know about what you believe in and your worldview is revealed in that snarky post.
There used to be at least some sense of shame over immortality.....now most posters in here seem to be supporting it.
She was being nice...I, however, could give a monkey fart in a mason jar about being nice
Let me give you the straight scoop...your Bible Belt residency and your American Express Christian Family Values Card don't A) mean jack flip to me or B) give you the right to sit on your hind end behind a laptop and tell ANYONE here, millennial or not, about their sex lives, marital status or lack thereof, the price of Jif peanut butter in Patagonia, or anything else for that matter...frankly, you need to pretend you're the driver of a noisy pickup truck, go outside, and shut your truck off
Further, I and everybody else here with an opinion, will say what we want, within the TOS, about the 'creator', the LA Dodgers bullpen staff, boxers or briefs, or anything ELSE that strikes them at any given moment
I am a grown-a** 63 year old man...I've been married four times, divorced three times, and really don't care what folks think of the number of marriages/divorces i've had...am I here to try and tell anyone else what THEY should do regarding marriage, WHEN they should marry, or WHEN they should date? Hell no...that's not my place, and people have the right to step up and check me if I ever do
Unfortunately, in both your unrelenting arrogance and your belief that your faith elevates you to some level of unearned imaginary superiority, you seem blind to the fact that unless you clone yourself a million times over so you can be in folks bedrooms like the Church Lady going 'tut tut, no sex til marriage!', that nobody here gives a rip or NEEDS to give a rip about you not liking something...period...end of frickin' story
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,943,649 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by danielj72
“Teen marriages”......another poster putting words in my mouth. More insults against our creator. Everything one needs to know about what you believe in and your worldview is revealed in that snarky post.
There used to be at least some sense of shame over immortality.....now most posters in here seem to be supporting it.
I would have no shame about being immortal, personally.
“Teen marriages”......another poster putting words in my mouth. More insults against our creator. Everything one needs to know about what you believe in and your worldview is revealed in that snarky post.
There used to be at least some sense of shame over immortality.....now most posters in here seem to be supporting it.
LOL not to go all grammar police on you, but your use of the word, "immortality" rather than what I know you meant, "immorality" has the Highlander "Who Wants To Live Forever?" by Queen theme song running through my head right now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by picardlx
It's a choir alright. Just an opposite one. A choir singing to a religious tunes of null. Many of whom seemingly just as intent and equally as vocal (if not more so) on 'saving others' as church goers.
Look, I can't speak to the motivations of other people. I respect the right of anybody to hold religious views. Though I am not about to convert. If they can live with that, I can live with them, just fine. I'm perfectly sure that if a religious person knew the half of my life story, they'd judge me an incorrigible degenerate, and I can live with that, too.
But it's a profound error to believe that simply because one isn't of the faith, or of any faith, that they have NO morals, ethics, or rules by which they live their lives. It's utter hypocrisy and ignorance. Which is why you'll have someone like me prepared to discuss my reasoning in life. I'm not trying to save or convert anybody. I don't care what you believe. But I have no more obligation to sit silently and be maligned, than anyone.
Fact is, I know a lot of non-religious people who have very, very strong ethics and morals. They are based on different reasoning, but a lot of the time, it's at least as strong for them, as a churchgoer's adherence to the dogma of their faith. (Especially given the vast numbers of Christians and others who cherry-pick which rules they like and which they don't from the Bible or other teachings.) My ethical framework is based on doing no harm. And generally speaking, the libertine activities that I get up to, carry low or no risk and harm no one. If I went to a party and had a dozen people please me with glove-clad hands, I'd be risking no pregnancy, and no disease, but I would bet a Christian would call it sinful just because...whatever. It would squick them for being a weird thing to do, and because it's purely for the pursuit of pleasure, and if there wasn't a rule against it, they'd find one.
Frankly, given the many messages of love, supporting the poor and the weak, and not judging others, that absolutely do exist in the Bible, it saddens me how many Christians I've known who mostly use it as a platform to shame and condemn other people, whose lives aren't even any of their business or affecting them in any fashion. And I will never comprehend the fear, that if something is accepted in some few people, then there's some kind of danger of it taking over and being what everyone does. MOST people seek to marry and have a family. MOST people want a mother and father for their children. It's what most people are doing.
And out of the rising number of single-parent households (since the mid-1900s) I think that there's some goodly number of them that are better off. But then, I come from a long line of abusive, alcoholic men in my ancestry. Some of the stories are downright horrific. I would prefer NOT to go back to a culture where if a man beat his wife, it was no one's business and she couldn't go anywhere or do anything about it. I don't think for one instant that this was a tiny minority of people suffering domestic abuse and misery, because they had no other choice. Men are responsible for most of the physical violence in society, and women are in more physical danger from their current or former partners, than from anyone.
Not everyone may go to church. But is the current alternative of rising single-parent homes, hookup culture, the decreasing value of sex and relationships, and chilvary being unpopular worth it?
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,943,649 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob-Man
Not everyone may go to church. But is the current alternative of rising single-parent homes, hookup culture, the decreasing value of sex and relationships, and chilvary being unpopular worth it?
The single parent homes I know about are due to divorces (one person abdicating the relationship) and incredibly bright, professional women who decided they wanted to have a child on their terms and not with any willing body. They also, across the board, married way too young (some as early as early 20s!!!!), which is of course spikes the divorce race as the people aren't even in adulthood yet, mentally. Some of the former have struggled when the guy abdicating the marriage, the latter have done wonderfully and are raising fine children. One did get married to a superb guy when her daughter was in middle school.
There is no "rise" of hook up cultures. Hook ups were all over the place in the late 60s and 70s (free love, remember?) and took a massive hit in the 80s when AIDS came along. Things have loosened up since then, but there is no reason to believe church has anything to do with it.
No idea what so called chivalry has to do with anything. Politeness is still valued. Holding a door open, etc. It just goes both ways now. I find educated professional women don't like to be patronized or treated like they're dolls, that's for sure.
Thing is, it used to be that when people thought of single Moms, they thought of black welfare queens with baby daddies ( Thanks, Reagan,) of teenage pregnancies, of promiscuous women or those who got tricked or pressured into sex by a smooth fella who promised love and then bailed...stuff like that.
A very large number of single parents are divorced. So they had presumably every intention of raising their kids with their partner, but it didn't work out.
Another big, and growing number, are single parents who live with a partner, who may or may not be the other parent of the kid(s). I lived with the father of my sons for 10 years before we legally married. This was because at our income levels, it hurt our tax situation considerably to be wed. When you're in the lower income brackets, particularly where the Earned Income Credit applies, that is often the case. For many people who rely on public assistance of some kind, getting married will actually take that away from them, and no job they're able to get will cover the difference. Sometimes a given parent can't even earn enough to pay for the cost of childcare. So, situationally, sometimes it just makes good survival sense to NOT be married. And no shaming or arguments about "sin" are going to matter to someone who just wants to keep a roof over their kids' heads and food in their bellies.
As for whatever number of people "should not have had kids" because they didn't have a stable enough life to support them...given the availability of birth control, and the general efficacy of it (failures if used correctly should be somewhat rare)...one wonders why they didn't have it, or use it. Maybe they didn't have health insurance or access to medical treatment. Maybe they were inadequately educated.
Regardless, I really don't think that "hookup culture" is to blame for most single parent households. The data doesn't support that.
“Teen marriages”......another poster putting words in my mouth. More insults against our creator. Everything one needs to know about what you believe in and your worldview is revealed in that snarky post.
There used to be at least some sense of shame over immortality.....now most posters in here seem to be supporting it.
Perhaps living in a certain Nathaniel Hawthorne novel would be more to your liking?
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,943,649 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cantabridgienne
Perhaps living in a certain Nathaniel Hawthorne novel would be more to your liking?
Wooosh to 90% of the Board.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
She Was Being Nice
Thanks, Reagan,) of teenage pregnancies, of promiscuous women or those who got tricked or pressured into sex by a smooth fella who promised love and then bailed...stuff like that.