NBC and CBS Ban Church Ad - Page 9 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-07-2004, 12:28 PM   #121
The Fly
 
pwmartin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: western Pennsylvania
Posts: 107
Local Time: 04:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar



My prayers aren't public. My thoughts aren't public. My sex is not public.

They aren't? Examine them more closely. If you pray for God to make you more patient, isn't that going to have an effect on the people around you?

Try to think of an example of a private prayer that will only affect you in the long run.

And an old proverb I heard about thoughts:

Watch your thoughts, for they become words.
Watch your words, for they become actions.
Watch your actions, for they become your character.
Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.

My sex affects no one but the myself and the person I am having sex with.

Dream on, dude.

Yes your relationships affect you wholistically. But why are you focusing on sex. My relationship with my father affects me, my relationship with my boss affects me. What two people do behind closed doors is their business, no one elses. PERIOD.
If I say much more, I'll belabor my point. So I'll shut up.
__________________

__________________
pwmartin is offline  
Old 12-07-2004, 12:29 PM   #122
The Fly
 
pwmartin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: western Pennsylvania
Posts: 107
Local Time: 04:44 PM
Whoops! I obviously don't know how to use this quote thing yet! I didn't mean to place my responses within the context of your quote, bonovoxsuperstar! Sorry!
__________________

__________________
pwmartin is offline  
Old 12-07-2004, 12:37 PM   #123
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 03:44 PM
My prayers may affect me and therefore the people around me, but it doesn't make them public. That's ridiculous.

By your definition nothing in the world would be private.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 12-07-2004, 12:40 PM   #124
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 03:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by pwmartin


If sexuality relationships are going to remain truly private, then we need to develop private marriage. But to my knowledge, nothing like that has ever existed (although Sting does sing about it in one song).
See you are not making sense here. If according to you every action(and for some reason you stress sex) affects me therefore affects my spouse, therefore affects her friends, therefore affects the community how will a "private marriage" change that?
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 12-07-2004, 12:52 PM   #125
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 02:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by pwmartin



This is a counter-cultural claim, but I do think that your or anyone else's behavior in the bedroom does have more of an affect on other people than you think. Your relationships affect you, wholistically, whether positively or negatively. And that result is de facto shared with everyone who comes into contact with you. In spite of what we'd LIKE to believe about any type of behavior, all actions have ripple affects on more than just the people immediately involved.

So then by your argument, a loving union between two members of the same sex would have a positive effect on everyone because ... well... LOVE is good.
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 12-07-2004, 12:54 PM   #126
The Fly
 
pwmartin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: western Pennsylvania
Posts: 107
Local Time: 04:44 PM
I am stressing sex because that seems to be the subject of this thread.

And you are hearing me correctly: my notion of public/private is significantly different from the dominant notion of today.

There is no private marriage...I was suggesting that tongue-and-cheek, based on the comments from those who say sexual behavior is purely private.
__________________
pwmartin is offline  
Old 12-07-2004, 01:01 PM   #127
The Fly
 
pwmartin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: western Pennsylvania
Posts: 107
Local Time: 04:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by joyfulgirl


So then by your argument, a loving union between two members of the same sex would have a positive effect on everyone because ... well... LOVE is good.
Perhaps. See, we're getting somewhere here. I have gay friends in what we call "committed relationships," and I think their stability of relationship does have a positive affect on others around them, insofar as they are committed to each other and build each other up...not if they're only together in order to suit each others' needs, which happens all too often in all kinds of relationships these days, be they homo- or heterosexual.

However, it becomes then a question of the sexual activity in which they engage, because that is certainly a known aspect of their relationship (not known in every detail, but known in general character). But we've already been over this, and plenty of people and communities have different ideas of what they think acceptable sexual behavior is (vis-a-vis the community's collective values).

Just because I'm committed to someone doesn't mean I should have be sexually intimate with them.
__________________
pwmartin is offline  
Old 12-07-2004, 01:08 PM   #128
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 03:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by pwmartin
I am stressing sex because that seems to be the subject of this thread.

And you are hearing me correctly: my notion of public/private is significantly different from the dominant notion of today.

There is no private marriage...I was suggesting that tongue-and-cheek, based on the comments from those who say sexual behavior is purely private.
Actually no, that's not what this thread is about.

You have no notion of public/private. According to your definition there is no private. But you still haven't made a case as to why it's wrong.
Quote:
However, it becomes then a question of the sexual activity in which they engage, because that is certainly a known aspect of their relationship (not known in every detail, but known in general character). But we've already been over this, and plenty of people and communities have different ideas of what they think acceptable sexual behavior is (vis-a-vis the community's collective values).

Just because I'm committed to someone doesn't mean I should have be sexually intimate with them
This is the most ridiculous argument I've heard. Acceptable sexual behavior? What does this mean? So according to your rather strange view of sex is homosexual sex is more harming to the community than hetero? I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but if this is what you are indeed saying you better find a way to back it up.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 12-07-2004, 01:17 PM   #129
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 02:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by pwmartin


However, it becomes then a question of the sexual activity in which they engage, because that is certainly a known aspect of their relationship (not known in every detail, but known in general character). But we've already been over this, and plenty of people and communities have different ideas of what they think acceptable sexual behavior is (vis-a-vis the community's collective values).

Just because I'm committed to someone doesn't mean I should have be sexually intimate with them.

You're not making any sense again. You are aware that hetero couples do basically the same things that gay couples do, right?

And no, you don't have to have sex in your committed relationship if you don't want to, but good luck with that.
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 12-07-2004, 01:30 PM   #130
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 04:44 PM
just to toss somethign out there -- i do believe that what happens in the private does affect the public, but this does not mean that we have no privacy, or are entitled to privacy. it's true that healthy people have healthy families, so it is in everyone's benefit for our society to equip it's citizens with the tools they need to create their own version of happiness. however, it is quite something else to proscribe certain behaviors that are assumed to lead to happiness.

when it comes to acceptable sexual behavior, i think the problem we're having, PW, is that you seem to be suggesting (though perhaps we're misinterpreting, and this is a forum built for misinterpretation, so no worries) that there is a single standard that we have agreed upon. in a way, you're right, but not in how you mean.

as a society, we have determined the following are *not* appropriate:

*sex with children
*sex with animals
*sex with those unable to give consent (i.e., they were passed out, drugged, etc.)
*rape

we're saying that some activites are out of bounds, because they have victims, but we're not saying which activites are in bounds. does that make sense? this is where privacy comes in. i can do whatever i want in my bedroom, provided it doesn't violate these taboos we have established. if i want to dress up like batman, or if i only want to have oral sex, or if i want to have sex underwater, all this is okay because there is no victim, it is not taboo, and i have decided that this is what makes me happy.

this is distinct from a society saying that not only are there bad ways to have sex, but there are good ways. like, only missionary style. or at least 3 times a week. or husbands must never be expected to perform oral sex on their wives.

is that distinction clear? forgive me if not, and i'll elaborate.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 12-07-2004, 01:33 PM   #131
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 03:44 PM
Irvine511
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 12-07-2004, 01:38 PM   #132
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 04:44 PM
I am sincerely intersted in your opinions of how my extremely good sex life has an impact on those I interact with:

[Q]This is a counter-cultural claim, but I do think that your or anyone else's behavior in the bedroom does have more of an affect on other people than you think. Your relationships affect you, wholistically, whether positively or negatively. And that result is de facto shared with everyone who comes into contact with you. In spite of what we'd LIKE to believe about any type of behavior, all actions have ripple affects on more than just the people immediately involved.[/Q]

And secondly, if I am in a homosexual relationship, and I am having the kind of sexuality you described here:

[Q]Take an example at the other extreme: imagine two people who are in a near model marriage. Their sex life is amazing. They "do it" all the time, to the near or complete satisfaction of both of them. It enhances their marriage, their relationship. Likewise, this stronger, more committed relationship will flow into the relationships around them. Their children will grow up in a loving home with healthy attitudes of fidelity and marriage, which will provide them with plenty of resources for their lives. They will most likely grow up and try to replicate their parents' relationships in their own, thus continuing the cycle.[/Q]

Why wouldn't the benefits of such be equally as positive as a heterosexual relationship?
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 12-07-2004, 01:38 PM   #133
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,270
Local Time: 03:44 PM
First off, thanks, Irvine, for getting what I was saying .

Second...

Quote:
Originally posted by pwmartin
You have taken my comments and run too far with them...into places I don't want to go.

Let me explain: marriage is the public's way of claiming a relationship. It is not just a ceremony. It is taking a relationship "public." That doesn't mean that you do your sex acts in view of others. It means it's public. There is a big difference. If two people tell you they're married, then there are certain things you, as a member of the public know about them: they are a legal entity; they are only having sexual relations with each other; (if it's a man and woman) they might be pregnant one day with one another's child; they have pledged to have strong feelings for each other---strong enough to try maintaining those feelings for the rest of their lives, etc. We may know these things about non-married people too, but never in the same way as married ones. That's a fact.
That's if they tell you, of course. You'd have to also consider the fact that not every couple announces that they're married (what about those who elope?), and you'd also have to consider the fact that people invite others to their weddings-they only let in those they feel comfortable sharing this news with. If they didn't invite you, it's therefore none of your concern.

And even then, yes, you can assume those things about them, but it's still not your place to get into their business regarding that stuff. It's still not your place to know exactly what kind of intimate things they do behind closed doors, it's still not your place to know if they will or won't have children, etc., etc.-if they want to let you know of that stuff, they will. Until then, that's their concern, not yours.

Quote:
Originally posted by pwmartin
The activities of the couple on their married night? Come ON! We may not know exactly what positions they're trying and how many times they do the nasty, but everyone, EVERYONE knows that's what the wedding night is for. It's the consummation. They are being sexual with one another...and that's OK!! It may not be done in plain view, but it's still public. By the way, in many cultures the village expects to see bloody bedsheets the next morning. Horrifying, huh?

I would assume this all would be the same if gay marriage were to be legalized. As the couple leaves the wedding party for their honeymoon...or when they go into their bedroom together at night, people are not thinking, "Gee, I wonder if they're going in there to play chess all night long?" If they're not married, we may never really know what they're up to. It's secret. But once they decide to take it public, everyone may legitimately assume that it's not chess going on in there!
Uh...I think you misunderstood me. I know people are going to assume that couples on their wedding night will be getting intimate with each other. I'm just saying that it's nobody's business how they get intimate, what kinds of things they do with each other during this time, etc., etc. The details of their night together should be their business and nobody else's. If they wish to make this stuff public, that's their choice, but it's not our place to ask them such personal questions, to dictate how they should be spending their intimate time together, etc., etc.

And you still haven't answered my question-you're a celibate, but suppose you ever did get a significant other. As Irvine said, would you be totally fine with the government trying to tell you that you can or can't be together? Would you be fine with people butting in and asking personal questions about your private time together?

I don't want to know the details of couples' private time together. As long as, when I see the couple in public, it seems that they're madly in love with each other and there's no physical or emotional abuse going on or something like that, I don't care what they do. And I certainly wouldn't want everyone else to know what I and the guy I date, or marry, do behind closed doors-that's our business, and nobody else's. And nobody else-not the government, not society, not even my friends and family-has the right to dictate to me who I can and can't be with-that's a choice I should be allowed to make. They can offer their personal thoughts on the guy I'm with, but they can't tell me flat out whether or not I should keep seeing him.

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 12-07-2004, 01:41 PM   #134
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 04:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
if i want to dress up like batman
I like to dress up like a hobbit.....because I am so hairy.

Is that so wrong?

Excellent post
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 12-07-2004, 01:50 PM   #135
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 02:44 PM
Irvine511, you rock.
__________________

__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com