BF2S Forums Why are Americans so scared of sex?

FallenMorgan wrote:

The Religious Right are slowly taking over the nation.  There's no way to get them to shut up, honestly.  Europe has a higher percentage of atheists, who are generally more rational, but America has around 4% or so.  It honestly sucks.  We have all these idiots who want to impose the ten commandments on the population, who want to make homosexuality illegal.

The FCC is slowly making tv suck for me.  The only show that can give me a boner is the Girls Next Door.  The FCC needs to be eliminated.  I doubt that if the FCC were eliminated, NBC wouldn't have "Law & Order sex orgie" or something, they could just have normal diologue, IE words like fuck, etc.  There would be some harcore cable porn though

zomg the fundamentalists are coming!!

Also:
Only 4% atheists in US?
Want to make homosexuality illegal?

Me thinks you need to do more research.

Last edited by Stingray24 (2008-05-18 12:05:32)

FallenMorgan wrote:

DoctaStrangelove wrote:

FallenMorgan wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades

The Crusades were faught more for plunder than for relgion. Most of the guys fighting them just wanted gold and a greater percentage of the kings leading them just wanted the gold.

You'll find that most conflicts supposedly about religion are really about money.

Still it was in the name of Christ and whatnot.  Also, if you look at all the percecution of non-Christians by Christians, you'll see that Christianity doesn't have a good history of being peaceful.

Check out how much persection has been done by Non-Christians in just the 20th century (Turkish Muslims killing the Armenian Christians during WW1, for example). About 3 million Christians have been killed by non-Christians since Rome's time, and thats only documented cases.

Last edited by BigOrangeArmy (2008-05-18 12:12:00)

BigOrangeArmy wrote:

FallenMorgan wrote:

DoctaStrangelove wrote:

The Crusades were faught more for plunder than for relgion. Most of the guys fighting them just wanted gold and a greater percentage of the kings leading them just wanted the gold.

You'll find that most conflicts supposedly about religion are really about money.

Still it was in the name of Christ and whatnot.  Also, if you look at all the percecution of non-Christians by Christians, you'll see that Christianity doesn't have a good history of being peaceful.

Check out how much persection has been done by Non-Christians in just the 20th century (Turkish Muslims killing the Armenian Christians during WW1, for example). About 3 million Christians have been killed by non-Christians since Rome's time, and thats only documented cases.

Religion is dogmatic really, all of them have percecuted someone who isn't the same religion as them.

FallenMorgan wrote:

DoctaStrangelove wrote:

FallenMorgan wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades

The Crusades were faught more for plunder than for relgion. Most of the guys fighting them just wanted gold and a greater percentage of the kings leading them just wanted the gold.

You'll find that most conflicts supposedly about religion are really about money.

Still it was in the name of Christ and whatnot.  Also, if you look at all the percecution of non-Christians by Christians, you'll see that Christianity doesn't have a good history of being peaceful.

You could justify the Crusades against the Mooj's in JewLand. You can't justify the Northern Crusades against the "Pagans" of Northern Europe.

Hell, most people are Christian or Islamic because their ancestors were forced to convert, or converted because they were either tricked by missionaries or forced because their king/ruler converted and changed the laws and shit. It's depressing to read about why you belong to XYZ religion for most. But people must and should know.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_Verden

Some 4,500 Saxon leaders are said to have been beheaded for practicing their indigenous paganism after having officially, albeit under duress, converted to Christianity and undergone baptism

How very nice. Well at least the Germans got their revenge on The French. And on the people who made the religion.

BigOrangeArmy wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

BigOrangeArmy wrote:

What are you talking about? Obama and Hillary aren't Christians (Stand for abortion, gay rights, etc. that are against the Bible) and McCain hasn't made any statement that he's a Christian.

What? 

LOL

The Bible doesn't stand for abortion or gay marriage. I mean, show me where it does. If I was running for president, and if I were a Christian, would I stand on an issue that doesn't agree with my beliefs? Just because someone claims to be a Christian doesn't make them a Christian. Their actions have to stand up to their beliefs. And tbh, the Clintons aren't exactly poster-boys for Christianity.

But going back to the sex question, its not that we're scared of it. We're afraid that poor little Tommy is going to see stuff on the TV that he shouldn't see at that age. Censorship until they can handle it is good .

The bible doesn't even mention abortion. Anywhere. Or gay marriage for that matter.

And by the by, since McCain has divorced (and engaged in adultery)...is he Christian? You should at least be consistent in your fantasy metrics.

FallenMorgan wrote:

DoctaStrangelove wrote:

FallenMorgan wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades

The Crusades were faught more for plunder than for relgion. Most of the guys fighting them just wanted gold and a greater percentage of the kings leading them just wanted the gold.

You'll find that most conflicts supposedly about religion are really about money.

Still it was in the name of Christ and whatnot.  Also, if you look at all the percecution of non-Christians by Christians, you'll see that Christianity doesn't have a good history of being peaceful.

Then atheism would be allot worse

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pol_pot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Jong_Ill

FallenMorgan wrote:

Oh yeah, forgot about the Old Testament.  It's really violent.  For example, in the book of Joshua, God tells them to commit genocide, basically.

On the subject Liquix brought up, abstinence education is pure bullshit.  "Hey guys, see that hot blonde girl?  You have to get married before you could hit her tight little ass, and you can't get married until your 18."  Bullshit, it's like telling a dog not to bark at the mailman.  Tell the little fuckers to wear a condom.

Not only is the Old Testement mostly a bunch of stories but Jesus said that the violent bits are not relevant to those who follow him.

They weren't doing it in the name of Atheism, unlike various Christian atrocities. Hitler wasn't even an Atheist. They had their own fucked up version of Christianity that was somehow not Jewish like normal Christianity, so they could justify their fucked up actions. What a bunch of twats!

I mean, it's one thing to hate on a group of people. But to do it, whilst following a religion they made up. It's hilarious. It's like how Persians hate Arabs yet follow Islam.

Last edited by Mek-Stizzle (2008-05-18 12:39:18)

Masques wrote:

nukchebi0 wrote:

Masques wrote:

The bible doesn't even mention abortion. Anywhere. Or gay marriage for that matter.

I'm almost certain it mentions something about the latter.

Certain kinds of homosexual conduct (ie. no bumfucking in temples and that sort of thing) but nothing in the context of a stable relationship or marriage. That in itself could be used as an argument against gay marriage, however, if you're working from a LITERAL interpretation of the bible then you have to work within a closely defined interpretation of the words. No adding your own biases, etc.

But that's the Old Testament which does not (at least in theory) apply to Christianity.

If you take the time to study them, they do not conflict at all ...

DoctaStrangelove wrote:

FallenMorgan wrote:

DoctaStrangelove wrote:

The Crusades were faught more for plunder than for relgion. Most of the guys fighting them just wanted gold and a greater percentage of the kings leading them just wanted the gold.

You'll find that most conflicts supposedly about religion are really about money.

Still it was in the name of Christ and whatnot.  Also, if you look at all the percecution of non-Christians by Christians, you'll see that Christianity doesn't have a good history of being peaceful.

Then atheism would be allot worse

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pol_pot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Jong_Ill

FallenMorgan wrote:

Oh yeah, forgot about the Old Testament.  It's really violent.  For example, in the book of Joshua, God tells them to commit genocide, basically.

On the subject Liquix brought up, abstinence education is pure bullshit.  "Hey guys, see that hot blonde girl?  You have to get married before you could hit her tight little ass, and you can't get married until your 18."  Bullshit, it's like telling a dog not to bark at the mailman.  Tell the little fuckers to wear a condom.

Not only is the Old Testement mostly a bunch of stories but Jesus said that the violent bits are not relevant to those who follow him.

They didn't say "I'm going to fuck up people's lives in the name of something that doesn't exist."  They were all Stalinist.  Stalinism is basically a cross between Communism and Fascism.  It says nothing about atheists.

konfusion wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Um...isn't Europe predominantly Christian? It's not like the US has cornered the market on Christianity or anything?

Wasn't the USA founded on the basis of Christianity? I mean, all the "before god", "under god" etc. stuff really makes it seem like it.

-konfusion

The reason why our money and certain other official government related things have God in them is because the Knights of Columbus heavily pushed for religious references to differentiate ourselves from the atheist Communists.

Unfortunately, this would be a harbinger of things to come with the evangelicals.  Although, the Knights are actually Catholic.

Turquoise wrote:

DoctaStrangelove wrote:

FallenMorgan wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades

The Crusades were faught more for plunder than for relgion. Most of the guys fighting them just wanted gold and a greater percentage of the kings leading them just wanted the gold.

You'll find that most conflicts supposedly about religion are really about money.

Most organized religion itself is about money more than faith as well.

One of my little theories as to why the Papacy proscribed marriage amongst priests relates to this.

It was only until the Medieval period when the church began to require clerics to be celibate, roughly corresponding to when the church began to grow in wealth and when many former pagans became Christians (Germanic pagans in particular).

In many Germanic societies it was customary for wealth to be split amongst all male heirs as opposed to the Roman practice of primogeniture (leaving everything or most of everything to the eldest male heir). Given that most low ranking priests would have come from the cultures in which the church was trying to grow; a priest allowed to marry would have split church property among his heirs instead of a single heir who may have been persuaded to become a member of the cloth.

Cultural habits die harder than religious ones. So in essence, clerical celibacy may have been a successful attempt to keep wealth "in house" as it were.

But that's just my theory...