Should there be more regulation of pornography? - Page 6 - 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 05-23-2005, 12:23 PM   #76
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511



i would then call that "faith."

i'm starting to get an allergy everytime i hear someone on the news saying, "this is what i believe." that seems like such a cop-out, a way of not thinking.
Belief is the first step of faith. You take away belief, you have no faith. Faith cannot exist without an underlying belief.
__________________

__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 12:32 PM   #77
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Belief is not passive. Not at all. I can not separate my beliefs from who I am or what I do - they are intertwined like a strong and sturdy weave.

What I "think" is not in contrast to my belief.

so which comes first: belief or thought?
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 12:37 PM   #78
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Belief is the first step of faith. You take away belief, you have no faith. Faith cannot exist without an underlying belief.


i agree, but with a big caveat: i'd say that faith is the maturation of belief.

faith, i respect; simple beliefs are little more than superstition.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 12:37 PM   #79
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 09:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




i agree, but with a big caveat: i'd say that faith is the maturation of belief.

faith, i respect; simple beliefs are little more than superstition.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 12:47 PM   #80
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,974
Local Time: 08:13 PM
Is this going to be about religion again? Can't we just get back to my "what turns you on" question? Clean discussions, of course
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 12:49 PM   #81
I serve MacPhisto
 
unforgettableFOXfire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 2,053
Local Time: 08:13 PM
Strangely, even though I strongly disagree with 80sU2isBest on the ideal of marriage, and think that belief in the biblical dictation of marriage ignores the historical precedent of marriage's corruption (which sours me on it but is not reason in itself to abandon belief in the religious value of the ceremony, I will conceed)...

I am inclined to agree, though, that seeing beauty and lust are connected in the mind, and you can control whether or not you feel lust. I would even go so far to say that the sexuality of nudity is entirely in the eye of the perceiver, and even the most overtly sexual nudity can be seen without striking up lusty passions in the person viewing it. This isn't denial, so much as state of mind. Nudity in art doesnt have to be seen as sexual, nudity on television, in magazines, or in real life; you really do choose how it affects you. We dont see things as they are, we see them as we are. If you see it as sexual, you're allowing it to provoke that from in you, but it's only really an issue when you allow it to provoke sexual feelings in you. So I guess, I sortof disagree in the sense that no ammount of nudity should be overpowering of your will, whether you look at it or look away. You can appreciate nudity like a scarlet sunset without doing anything illicit or wrong. There's so much beauty in the world, why should the human body, one of the most beautiful and ugly of all things be treated any differently? Everything is beautiful, and everything can be appreciated as beautiful on the same plane.

I had a problem a few weeks ago where I was at a party with my friends, and my friend's ex-girlfriend decided to get naked and strut around. My girlfriend wasn't there to witness it, but I still had to tell her what happened, simply out of principle. The thing is, though, I didn't see that nudity as being a sexual thing, or something that stoked the flames of passion or any such thing. The 'betrayal' or 'adultery' occurs in the mind, the act of allowing someone other than the one you love to enter your thoughts in the one way reserved expressly for the one you love. Of course, I think anyone might agree that this is a 'betrayal' in some purely philosophical way, but I think many will argue that you can see something arousing without forcing the love of your partner out of your heart in lieu of this momentary indulgence. I don't think the simple 'seeing of nudity' equates to betrayal, there needs to be some sort of action on behalf of the perceiver, whether that's allowing lusty feelings, or worse still, allowing lusty feelings to dictate physical actions.

The argument can be made, I think some will agree, that once you make it acceptable to admit these lusty feelings into your mind, that the 'foot is in the door' so to speak that might slowly force lust into your hearts in more increasing 'severity' if it can be measured in such a way. I don't really agree with that, myself, but a lot of people think that 'slippery slope' is the end-all of causality-related theories. What it comes down to is whether your love is more important to you than feelings of lust, and most people have the strength in their love to force that door closed as soon as it's opened without allowing any sort of transgression to occur. You can choose where to draw the line before you slide all the way to the bottom with things like this. Where I turned away and stared into the night whenever not talking to one of my friends on the night I mentioned earlier, one of my friends went so far as to cop a consentual feel of the naked lady despite having a girlfriend. He didn't draw that line, he let himself be won over by his passions in a clearly unacceptable manner. Maybe if you're single, this is okay, but if you're not... well, yeah. Of course, having known him for 7 years, his actions didn't suprise me at all, and it certainly doesn't suprise me that he's still with his girlfriend because he only told her about the nudity and not the groping. But, you know, what happens in other peoples lives is their business.
__________________
unforgettableFOXfire is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 12:55 PM   #82
I serve MacPhisto
 
unforgettableFOXfire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 2,053
Local Time: 08:13 PM
As for faith/belief... I'm not sure there's any real difference between faith/belief. We believe we know what we know; we have faith in our knowledge. Two ways of saying the same thing. This does not make our 'knowing' any more true or meaningful. Why someone would give privelige to 'faith' over 'belief', I'm not sure; except if it gives them an excuse to write off what others believe in as wrong/superstitious/false/flawed whereas they have 'faith' and therefore are somehow elevated and true. That's just me, though.
__________________
unforgettableFOXfire is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 02:15 PM   #83
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by ~unforgettableFOXfire~

The 'betrayal' or 'adultery' occurs in the mind, the act of allowing someone other than the one you love to enter your thoughts in the one way reserved expressly for the one you love. Of course, I think anyone might agree that this is a 'betrayal' in some purely philosophical way, but I think many will argue that you can see something arousing without forcing the love of your partner out of your heart in lieu of this momentary indulgence. I don't think the simple 'seeing of nudity' equates to betrayal, there needs to be some sort of action on behalf of the perceiver, whether that's allowing lusty feelings, or worse still, allowing lusty feelings to dictate physical actions.

i guess i don't agree. i don't think we can be held responsible or found guilty for our thoughts, only our actions. i really can't help it if i see someone and feel sexual feelings, i can help by not acting on those feelings. i don't think that my eventual partner can, will, and *should* be able to be all things to me sexually, or even personally. why do you think people have best friends? don't you need people with whom you can talk about your spouse?

i think people often expect too much out of marriage -- that they create impossible standards and then are profoundly disappointed when things don't work out. i know that there are some very, very happily married people in here and they offer accounts to the contrary, and that's great -- i am very happy for them, but i think they are the exception rather than the rule.

i am not saying that one should cheat, but i am saying that the urge to have sex with other people is totaly normal, isn't something to fear, and it's only the action that warrants censure. to me, having these feelings, and understanding them -- *not* repressing them -- and then choosing not to act on them strikes me as a very loving action towars the health of the relationship. to me, staying together is the goal, the union itself is the greatest good, not strict adherence to whatever "rules" you've picked.

why not talk about these things? might such a discussion not lead to a more creative sex life? communicate with your partner -- if something is missing, try and put it there. if you want to do something that you haven't done before, for pete's sake, go ahead and ask your partner.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 03:22 PM   #84
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,332
Local Time: 05:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

i think people often expect too much out of marriage -- that they create impossible standards and then are profoundly disappointed when things don't work out. i know that there are some very, very happily married people in here and they offer accounts to the contrary, and that's great -- i am very happy for them, but i think they are the exception rather than the rule.
I think that you'll find the happily married people here have much more realistic expectations from their marriage than you may think. It's the people who set up all kinds of "rules" that end up miserable. Adaptation is a key component of a happy, functioning, growing marriage.



Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

i am not saying that one should cheat, but i am saying that the urge to have sex with other people is totaly normal, isn't something to fear, and it's only the action that warrants censure. to me, having these feelings, and understanding them -- *not* repressing them -- and then choosing not to act on them strikes me as a very loving action towars the health of the relationship.
Exactly. Everyone feels things for others. It's the choices you make about those feelings that matter. Including the choices you make about your responses to porn (to bring this back to the topic).
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 03:45 PM   #85
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by martha


I think that you'll find the happily married people here have much more realistic expectations from their marriage than you may think. It's the people who set up all kinds of "rules" that end up miserable. Adaptation is a key component of a happy, functioning, growing marriage.


yes, that's precisely what i was hoping to get at.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 04:09 PM   #86
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 07:13 PM
If it wasn't pornography, it would be a vivid imagination.

Oh sure, like any person with common sense, I say regulate it, keep it away from impressionable kids, but make it avaliable to consenting adults. Do what you have to do, otherwise.

What did people do before motion pictures and film to releive their sexual tensions? I guess they used their imagination.

Oh, I guess morally speaking it's a form of lust.

But physically speaking, and I do mean purely physical, if you beleive as I do that God created us and our hormones, that this is a purely natural thing to do?

I mean,if the sin is the act of lust itself, then what difference does it make if it's on film, or if it's an imagination?

I'd have to think that most men not looking at porn, have an active imagination. Not merely because I think we are creatures of lust, which we probably are, but merely I think it's part of our physicality. It's a natural process. Contolling it is probably the test of humanity. Yanking one out doesn't seem to be anything other than meeting a physical need, what difference does it make if it's done imagining a woman or looking at one on film?

And if you don't masturbate, and you just view, is it still a sin?
If you view a pornographic tape and take no sexual pleasure or lust from it, then it's hardly the act of viewing a tape itself is it?
So it's has to be the lust itself. The viweing of X,Y or Z whether it's in your head or on tape is irrelevant to the morality argument.

Easy target, that's all it is. Are you going to try and convince me that the guy next door who has been married to the same woman for 30 years doesn't have lustful thoughts about other women even if he's never viewed a porno or magazine his whole life?
I am going to say I don't think it's physically possible.
I wouldnt say he ever acted anything out, I would say he thought about it, so what is the difference between that and looking at a porno tape? None, morally.

I think your physical needs like water and food, and the occasional morning wood are just that.
Purely physical. Intelligent design included hormones, methinks.
__________________
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 08:14 PM   #87
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 08:13 PM
good question -- if we are meant to control and suppress lust, and if lust is a sin, just why do we have morning wood pretty much every morning?

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 08:15 PM   #88
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
good question -- if we are meant to control and suppress lust, and if lust is a sin, just why do we have morning wood pretty much every morning?
Biology 101.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 08:22 PM   #89
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by martha
It's the people who set up all kinds of "rules" that end up miserable.
By making such a blanket statement, you are doing exactly what you accused me of:

"This is true, but you don't present your views on it as absolutes, which he does."

Martha, you have proven my earlier point, that most people treat their own beliefs as absolute truth, not just me.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 05-23-2005, 08:33 PM   #90
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest

Biology 101.


didn't God create biology?

seems like he keeps setting us up to fail.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 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 08:13 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