Competing World Views Of Religious Liberals And Conservatives

[Steven]

If Christians weren't rabidly pushing their faith on others the secularists wouldn't have a reason to take them seriously and there would be no need for any legislation. Not that there is "need" now, per se (and I personally believe it's counterproductive), but no one would see the need for legislation.

She KNOWS it's a sin, but she doesn't appear to see why it's "immoral" outside the banner of religion, I believe. And I agree with her.

I dont really think Xtians are pushing their faith and values anymore than any other religeous or secular group my freind, I think its pretty much equal opportunity, and that for some reason as humans we tend to do that to one another in general.....we prostelitize that which we feel is important. I see it here on DGN every single day, and I dont ahve a problem with what is being sent in my direction. Especially in a couthry that is supposedly upholding the notion of free speach....and I always go back to the nitty gritty, which is quite simply that no one is kidnapping and brainwashing your children and if you have an elevated worldview that dismisses religeous drivel then honestly why worry? IN theory the masses will in time dismiss it al because the masses will recognize the lack of relevancy to it all.

.......but the problem is that people still crave some form of spirituality....you need to cure that wicked craving to solve the problem once and for all, because this is repetitive human nature and its everywhere in our history. SO - either crush it outright (which is happeningn in the world) or institute a State Provided alternative (Zieg Heil). One way or the other.....I think (and I'm jsut some uneducated dude) I htink we're headed that way.

by the way in places like, China....nobody is rigourusly pushing their faith on anybody, in fact christians meet in secret...sort of like the old days of Nero that I mentioned. And in both cases, the empires in power feel threated by Xtianity for the simple reason that the Xtian begins to place faith in personal liberation. Cant have mass control with a virus mentality like that running around unchecked.....

It's very irritating to be bound by the expectations of a Christian culture when I'm not Christian, and see my fellow atheist/agnostic chums fall into those traps.

now how in the world have I tired to bind you Love? really?

lets broaden it...how in the world has ANYBODY within my 2000 member church in Canton tried to bind you or control you? This culture may claim a Christian identity Erin, but just because you've got the Christian right "supposedly" in control (and the media loves to feed you this idea, the same media that wants to poke enough holes in the dike to make it collapse) of things does not mean that it is in fact, true.

Look around you Babe. Lookk at your peer group. 99% of you, agree with YOU, not me.

YOU all will be in charge, not me.

Speak to the generation beneath you, they are even MORE disenchanted or otherwise alientated or simply not exposed to Judeo Christian techings, the odds are stacking up higher and higher in your favor. Open the newspaper or pull any common magazine off the shelf and look at the advertisements and topics of discussion. NONE of them are delivering a tradional or even slightly Judeo Christian message. Listen to the music, read the lyrics - the anger against cats like me is mounting more and more. Wtach regular TV and flip the the channels, again the overall mesaage is anything BUT Christian. The majority of the "stimuli" headed out to the american masses is - not in support of the notion that this is a christian culture. ANd many of you have argued effectively here (and I agree) that most christians you know dont even know their bible, their faith, their God, their purpose....so honestly how can somethign so conflcited and without foundation have any real potency as a threat against someone liek yoruself who is very well armed in the intillect department and who has a growing and thriving support group all around you?

nobody is trapping you. let your chums live as they will, do as they will. If they become committed changlings like I did then so be it, this is life in a free state while it is still free.

stop worrying Erin.

with the exception of a few colorful wack packs like myself, I truly beleive you'l get your wish.

[kellygrrrrrl]

I could think of a LOT of reasons Not to have pre-marital sex (Or loose sex whatever)....consequences as I like to see them.....

* Disease - AIDS, Clap, Herpes, Chlamydia, HPV....etc....

* Unwanted Children (this having to make difficult and serious decision that most don't take seriously

* Heartbreak -

*Loss of trust (Which tunmbles into future relationships), Expectation or a idealized views or dreams fantasies on how sex "should" be...

* Lust - makes a man do some crazy shit. Rape little kids, young gals, little boys etc....animals.....etc...

sure there are ways to get around all this stuff.....

But I think in the end, it shows self-control, compassion, and love....which I think is the whole point.

But, what it comes down to in this WHOLE conversation is, unless you belive in a higher power, this conversation is completely poitless.

If you don't, this all sounds like preaching...and old fashion, or old world.....

Freedom is a wonerful thing thing that comes with a lot of stress, baggage - stems into future relationships, heartache, addiction, consequences....all these things have consequences too. Stress = ailments, anxiety, etc...I think you can still abide by simplistic values and come out with a very humbling or satisfying lifestyle....it ain't like being locked down in a cage if thats what some might think.

I try to keep it simply put and not so literal, I try to make a very very basic point.

Now, I'm a "sinner" ok.....

But I can see the simple logic behind a lot of the "commandments"....."rules" etc.....

But if you have no faith in a "god" whatsoever, then again, this is a pointless converation and I''m not about to convince anyone to belive in a god.

I think that comes in time and with deep thought and concideration.

A personal expirience.

You can tell poeple this stuff, and tell your children, but it comes down to choice and consequence....but with good teaching and "modeling" perhaps people will make better decisions, and come out with better consequences.,

[kellygrrrrrl]

What I gather is that this fella is trying to argue is:

You can sin, I won't judge you, GOD will.

But in the meantime, I'll be nice to you, not ostrasize you and make fun of you or kill you becasue you sin.

But in the back of our self riteous (OH GOD this is such bad spelling)mind we'll know whos "really" going to hell.....or die really.

I don't like that approach

It don't work

Why do we have laws?

Why do we have rules?

Why do we have anything like that if there is no GOD.

WHy do we feel guilt why do we have remorse?

If there is no god, then essentially, we don't need ANY rules.

Because it comes down to our concious. And when we step on that why do we feel guilty? why do we feel bad?

Wrong?

People would run around like a pack of wolves - which I see in more youthful groups.......

Raw, narcissistic, no values morals, haughty, and comepletely out of hand.

Empty. Sad. Depressed on all sorts of cocktails of drugs....(anti-depressants/anxiety/manic/etc)

I know *I* saw this all around me in school.....

[sinmantyx]

If Christians weren't rabidly pushing their faith on others the secularists wouldn't have a reason to take them seriously and there would be no need for any legislation. Not that there is "need" now, per se (and I personally believe it's counterproductive), but no one would see the need for legislation.

Be careful there. You are starting to sound like my sister, but not about Christianity but about homosexuality. How many times have I heard...."If they would just get back in the closet and stop parading around, there wouldn't be a problem?"

Civil liberty is for us all. Christians have enjoyed a VERY privileged position in U.S. society and government for a VERY VERY long time. I think the reason many do not see the dangers of the "tyranny of the majority" and theocracy is because they have not, in their lifetimes, actually been SERIOUSLY oppressed by their society or government. The idea that the biggest Christian-right bitch of recent memory was people inclusively saying "Happy Holidays" in customer service positions instead of the exclusive "Merry Christmas" is a great example of their complacency and clueless mindset. I think if many of them were ACTUALLY persecuted their mind would blow-up. Seriously, how far does your head have to be up your ass to be annoyed about that?

Anyway, I hope you get my point. If a shift of power does occur toward, say, secular humanists, we will certainly be judged by history by how WE treated the minority. Certainly we are better than to treat a Christian minority the way that many Christians in power are treating other groups currently.

[sinmantyx]

....so honestly how can somethign so conflcited and without foundation have any real potency as a threat against someone liek yoruself who is very well armed in the intillect department and who has a growing and thriving support group all around you?

They are a threat BECAUSE they don't know and because they allow themselves to be pawns in the political process. I can't explain to you how physical ill I was after the last election, not just because of Bush (although that kinda sucked) but all the anti-gay marriage amendments. It was traumatic. I had no idea that so many people felt that way. Since I do hang out with a certain group of people, I FORGOT. I forgot what people were like. Both democrats and republicans voted for those amendments, and I'm sure it wasn't just the Christians casting their votes.

However, when you hear so many times that, "I couldn't possible condone gay marriage because I'm a good Christian so I voted for it!" I really truly want to cry. When Lapeer county CITY COUNCIL passes a resolution that basically blames AIDS on gays and quotes the BIBLE. I certainly understand who is in charge.

Now, because of those actions, my friends and colleagues are in real danger of losing health benefits for their families.

Forget the media! I don't care about pop culture. That's no way to somehow completely DENY that Christians (and some of the crazy ones) are in control and they are hurting me and my friends...because they ARE...in REAL ways, every fucking day.

[BrassFusion]

They are a threat BECAUSE they don't know and because they allow themselves to be pawns in the political process. I can't explain to you how physical ill I was after the last election, not just because of Bush (although that kinda sucked) but all the anti-gay marriage amendments. It was traumatic. I had no idea that so many people felt that way. Since I do hang out with a certain group of people, I FORGOT. I forgot what people were like. Both democrats and republicans voted for those amendments, and I'm sure it wasn't just the Christians casting their votes.

However, when you hear so many times that, "I couldn't possible condone gay marriage because I'm a good Christian so I voted for it!" I really truly want to cry. When Lapeer county CITY COUNCIL passes a resolution that basically blames AIDS on gays and quotes the BIBLE. I certainly understand who is in charge.

Now, because of those actions, my friends and colleagues are in real danger of losing health benefits for their families.

Forget the media! I don't care about pop culture. That's no way to somehow completely DENY that Christians (and some of the crazy ones) are in control and they are hurting me and my friends...because they ARE...in REAL ways, every fucking day.

I can't believe it, hon, I was in the exact same boat. I had a nervous breakdown on 11/3/04 for the exact same reason.

Anyway, Steven: Have you ever heard of Buddhism? It's a great damn religion because it doesn't view itself as the only "true" path. I don't know whether you feel that YOUR faith is the only true path, but at the very least you treat others like it may not be. You treat people with respect, and I love that.

I still believe that atheist/agnostics are lower on the pecking order than deists (of any stripe) in America, and if you want proof I'll point to the elected officials. Can ANYONE find me evidence of an elected official who self-identifies as an atheist? I would weep tears of joy.

I honestly believe that many politicians hold secular beliefs but masquerade as practicing Christians because they just would not get elected otherwise. No way in hell, so to speak. And if I'm right and that's true, how incredibly sad is that?

[sinmantyx]

If there is no god, then essentially, we don't need ANY rules.

Because it comes down to our concious. And when we step on that why do we feel guilty? why do we feel bad?

Wrong?

People would run around like a pack of wolves - which I see in more youthful groups.......

Raw, narcissistic, no values morals, haughty, and comepletely out of hand.

Empty. Sad. Depressed on all sorts of cocktails of drugs....(anti-depressants/anxiety/manic/etc)

I know *I* saw this all around me in school.....

THAT is what I'm talking about. I TOTALLY disagree with you. Believing in God or a higher power is not necessary to living an ethical life. The lie is that without God, somehow people become animals. THEY DON'T.

Take the stats of atheists for example. They are much less likely to be criminals (or at least be caught). Their percentage in the general population is much larger than their percentage in the prison population. This can be interpreted in various ways, I'm sure. However, it doesn't support the idea that without belief in a God you get chaos. Go here. Atheists and Agnostics are also less likely to get divorced than Christians. Go here. (Please excuse the reference. I would hope that "atheist empire" would change their name, but hey...they had the stats all in one place.)

If this lie were true. Atheists, such as myself, would be running around with "raw, narcissistic" values and be bathing in hedonistic sex-orgies or some-such dumb thing. That just simply doesn't happen.

All the people in high school I knew that slept around and drunk too much certainly went to church! Why? Because it was socially acceptable to do so. They would get shipped off to Bible Camp every year and every year they would have some sort of "conversion experience" and be good for a few months and go back to their old ways. Why? Because their faith was built on emotional manipulation and their behavior was not based on reason but rules.

I do see many reasons not to have premarital sex. Many of the reasons you mentioned I agree with. I will most likely advise my children that premarital sex has consequences, both physical and emotional. Sex is something they should respect. It is, in a naturalist philosophy, one of the most sacred acts in one's life. Why? Because it is an act of bonding with another person, it is a basic human function that we are instinctively drawn to and in some cases it can produce offspring. (I think this secular concept is MUCH healthier than the traditional Christian view of "original sin".)

If they choose monogamy, serial monogamy, polyamory, or even swinging (heaven forbid); they will at least have a clue of what risks and challenges their choices may present to them and even if they choose for themselves a course of action that I would not choose *for* them, I will respect their choice.

(I'm not sure about the last reason you mentioned, in fact I would actually tell you the COMPLETE opposite. I tend to think if someone does not have a healthy sexual life, sometimes it is much more likely to exhibit itself in unhealthy ways. Gay people married to someone of the opposite sex, for religious reasons for example, are sometimes very troubled. I think it is reasonable to interpret "It's better to marry than to burn." in a broad sense. It's better to have a healthy sexual life than have an unsatisfying or non-existent one. Premarital sex, in my opinion is not the result of "moral decay" but the result of an increasing marriage age. It's absolute abuse to expect people to not have sex until they are 25 or 30 years old when they have been sexually mature for almost 15 years.)

[sinmantyx]

by teh way what do you beleive the workign definition of "SIN" is? (I ask because it helps to paint a certain picture)

Well, theologically speaking a sin is a transgression against God.

Practically speaking, I think "sin" is used to describe a transgression of a rule or social norm of the church you happen to go to that was "brought down from God" for us to follow without question.

Or..if you want me to get all Lutheran on you: Sin is a state of being. Since human beings are naturally "sinful and unclean" and in their current state (due to the fall of humanity....BAD EVE!) "fall short of the glory of God" it is only by God's grace that we can be saved from our justifiable punishment of hell. To embrace sin is an insult to God, however because of our imperfections it is impossible to escape sin completely. So, as I said, "sin" is a state of being human.

[sinmantyx]

I honestly believe that many politicians hold secular beliefs but masquerade as practicing Christians because they just would not get elected otherwise. No way in hell, so to speak. And if I'm right and that's true, how incredibly sad is that?

This is true. It goes by denomination as well. Being Catholic or Jewish certainly doesn't help you at the polls.

MLK and his wife were considering UU for a while (no lie), but realized that they could never become leaders in the black community or the United States as a whole as members of UU. There was also a gay man who worked with them that did much of the organization for his most famous speech at the capitol; but MLK (in his lifetime) never took up gay rights issues because basically the country wasn't ready for that. His wife, however, was a gay rights activist before she passed away.

We did get our first Islamic congressmen (go Minnesota) and he was sworn in on Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran. Awesome

We do have a Buddhist serving as Rep of Hawaii. Does that make you smile?

[BrassFusion]

This is true. It goes by denomination as well. Being Catholic or Jewish certainly doesn't help you at the polls.

MLK and his wife were considering UU for a while (no lie), but realized that they could never become leaders in the black community or the United States as a whole as members of UU. There was also a gay man who worked with them that did much of the organization for his most famous speech at the capitol; but MLK (in his lifetime) never took up gay rights issues because basically the country wasn't ready for that. His wife, however, was a gay rights activist before she passed away.

We did get our first Islamic congressmen (go Minnesota) and he was sworn in on Thomas Jefferson's Qu'ran. Awesome

We do have a Buddhist serving as Rep of Hawaii. Does that make you smile?

Yes.

[Shade Everdark]

I can't believe it, hon, I was in the exact same boat. I had a nervous breakdown on 11/3/04 for the exact same reason.

Anyway, Steven: Have you ever heard of Buddhism? It's a great damn religion because it doesn't view itself as the only "true" path. I don't know whether you feel that YOUR faith is the only true path, but at the very least you treat others like it may not be. You treat people with respect, and I love that.

I still believe that atheist/agnostics are lower on the pecking order than deists (of any stripe) in America, and if you want proof I'll point to the elected officials. Can ANYONE find me evidence of an elected official who self-identifies as an atheist? I would weep tears of joy.

I honestly believe that many politicians hold secular beliefs but masquerade as practicing Christians because they just would not get elected otherwise. No way in hell, so to speak. And if I'm right and that's true, how incredibly sad is that?

I am not trying to cast myself as the victim; when it comes to issues of faith, a victim is the last thing I am. I keep it to myself because that is what I am most comfortable doing, so few know in my dealings outside the scene, and thus don't care.

There is a poll (here, I think: Gallup Poll) that appears to indicate that more people would be willing to vote for a gay person to be President than they would for an atheist. Given the tenor of general American sentiment towards the rights that ought to be afforded homosexuals, by that pesky Constitution and its sidekick the Bill of Rights, it scares me just a little, to see those numbers.

[sinmantyx]

I am not trying to cast myself as the victim; when it comes to issues of faith, a victim is the last thing I am. I keep it to myself because that is what I am most comfortable doing, so few know in my dealings outside the scene, and thus don't care.

There is a poll (here, I think: Gallup Poll) that appears to indicate that more people would be willing to vote for a gay person to be President than they would for an atheist. Given the tenor of general American sentiment towards the rights that ought to be afforded homosexuals, by that pesky Constitution and its sidekick the Bill of Rights, it scares me just a little, to see those numbers.

I wrote quite a long post about just that issue a few moons ago. If you are interested, it is here.

[Steven]

They are a threat BECAUSE they don't know and because they allow themselves to be pawns in the political process. I can't explain to you how physical ill I was after the last election, not just because of Bush (although that kinda sucked) but all the anti-gay marriage amendments. It was traumatic. I had no idea that so many people felt that way. Since I do hang out with a certain group of people, I FORGOT. I forgot what people were like. Both democrats and republicans voted for those amendments, and I'm sure it wasn't just the Christians casting their votes.

However, when you hear so many times that, "I couldn't possible condone gay marriage because I'm a good Christian so I voted for it!" I really truly want to cry. When Lapeer county CITY COUNCIL passes a resolution that basically blames AIDS on gays and quotes the BIBLE. I certainly understand who is in charge.

Now, because of those actions, my friends and colleagues are in real danger of losing health benefits for their families.

Forget the media! I don't care about pop culture. That's no way to somehow completely DENY that Christians (and some of the crazy ones) are in control and they are hurting me and my friends...because they ARE...in REAL ways, every fucking day.

well you cant just deny pop culture and the media though, because we have short sighted memories and the machine is quite powerful. Im no fan of it, I'm simply stating what I think is obvious in terms of a shift of ideals. To me thats sort of like saying FORGET Oxygen, it doesent matter...... yet it sustains us nonetheless.

[BrassFusion]

well you cant just deny pop culture and the media though, because we have short sighted memories and the machine is quite powerful. Im no fan of it, I'm simply stating what I think is obvious in terms of a shift of ideals. To me thats sort of like saying FORGET Oxygen, it doesent matter...... yet it sustains us nonetheless.

It's not that we're trying to deny pop culture and the media, but the fact that secularism is somehow positively represented in the media doesn't mean it plays out that way in city hall. A lot of new laws are still based on your bible.

[sinmantyx]

It's not that we're trying to deny pop culture and the media, but the fact that secularism is somehow positively represented in the media doesn't mean it plays out that way in city hall. A lot of new laws are still based on your bible.

YES..that is exactly what I meant. In fact, I REALLY like a lot of pop culture. However, I think pop culture actually made me forget the reality of the situation, the last election is what brought it into focus.

I think that was actually part of the plan. The anti-gay marriage movement has been "grassroots"...using mail campaigns and spreading among conservative church communities. Because their political efforts were outside of the main media, people like me were blind sided. I mean...where were the TV commercials? Where were the public rallies with news coverage? Basically, we failed because we didn't understand how heavy the support for such measures actually were.

[Steven]

It's not that we're trying to deny pop culture and the media, but the fact that secularism is somehow positively represented in the media doesn't mean it plays out that way in city hall. A lot of new laws are still based on your bible.

for the time being yes, I can admit to this.

but "my" bible is just a dusty old book no?

at some point, you have to look at teh people behind the push, and I beleive that a definite changing of the gaurd is allready in motion.

[Steven]

Well, theologically speaking a sin is a transgression against God.

Practically speaking, I think "sin" is used to describe a transgression of a rule or social norm of the church you happen to go to that was "brought down from God" for us to follow without question.

Or..if you want me to get all Lutheran on you: Sin is a state of being. Since human beings are naturally "sinful and unclean" and in their current state (due to the fall of humanity....BAD EVE!) "fall short of the glory of God" it is only by God's grace that we can be saved from our justifiable punishment of hell. To embrace sin is an insult to God, however because of our imperfections it is impossible to escape sin completely. So, as I said, "sin" is a state of being human.

thank you for this.

a couple of additional thoughts to consider.....

"SIN" by way of definition in the Hebrew and or Aramaic, is an archery term that means "to miss the mark".

Im not watering down here by the way......

If God had an original intention for mankind, that included his being able to reach full potential as a "perfect" being, then that corruption of the original intention is the new standard for existence.

In other words, sinful man, is man short of the original intention and fullness, having missed the mark.

I suggested in the past that "sin" prevents imperfection from being able to safely enter into a state of perfection, thus needing a covering, sort of like a surgeons sterilized gown and instruments and the surgical room tiself being a state of "cleanliness" - that must be preserved to meet the goal at hand. Thus the covering. IN this case, a messianic covering that intercedes onbehalf of a sinful state of being.

by the way it wasent Eve's fault, it was Adam's.

nobody knew they were naked (the manifestation of sin) until Adam ate, and Eve ate first.

I just had this conversation earlier today over grits....

[Msterbeau]

Hi!! I'm back!! Did you all miss me?

Sorry... work obligations and visiting family got in the way of coming back to be involved in what I started. I'll try and catch up tomorrow....

[sinmantyx]

Here's a better source for U.S. divorce rates.

Conservative Christians have the highest divorce rate. One reason my friend thought might be the case is that they are quick to marry in order to have sex or because of social obligation. One reason mentioned in the article might be because they lack relationship skills due to basically, trusting God to fix it. I'm not so keen on that, I think it might have more to do with a stigma of even HAVING marital problems, so people don't get the support they need.

[Steven]

Here's a better source for U.S. divorce rates.

Conservative Christians have the highest divorce rate. One reason my friend thought might be the case is that they are quick to marry in order to have sex or because of social obligation. One reason mentioned in the article might be because they lack relationship skills due to basically, trusting God to fix it. I'm not so keen on that, I think it might have more to do with a stigma of even HAVING marital problems, so people don't get the support they need.

you are correct - it is the stigma of having marital problems, and a lack of an appropriate address.

[sinmantyx]

you are correct - it is the stigma of having marital problems, and a lack of an appropriate address.

Appropriate address?

I guess if you mean that the "Bible Belt" really burns the numbers, I would have to agree. It's not like these numbers have been "adjusted" for socio-economic class or other stressors. The correlation is there, but the causation might be completely different.

...kinda like the fact that you are much less likely to be in prison if you are an atheist or agnostic. It probably has more to do with other factors that make you MORE likely to be an atheist or agnostic (such as socio-economic class and IQ) than somehow being a theist making you more prone to crime.

I don't mean to insult the Christians on here by implying that "smart people are atheists" or that sort of drivel. However, as many of you know (if you have been involved in various churches) that since Christianity is the most socialy acceptible religion you certainly have bandwagoners galore who completely lack introspection and follow for followings sake; many would certainly claim Christianity only because it is expected of them and not because it has anything to do with personal conviction or belief, or because they have been emotionally manipulated into cathartic conversion experiences. (Kind of the same knee-jerk reaction you generally get if you ask someone if they "love democracy.")

You also have the factor that those who are agnostic or atheist (especially atheists) are those who report as being agnostic and atheist and not "non-religious" or some sort of thing. So you get the subset of people who are willing to report a fact despite social stigma. This also colors the various other shared traits that may have very little to do with the religion itself.

[Steven]

Appropriate address?

I guess if you mean that the "Bible Belt" really burns the numbers, I would have to agree. It's not like these numbers have been "adjusted" for socio-economic class or other stressors. The correlation is there, but the causation might be completely different.

...kinda like the fact that you are much less likely to be in prison if you are an atheist or agnostic. It probably has more to do with other factors that make you MORE likely to be an atheist or agnostic (such as socio-economic class and IQ) than somehow being a theist making you more prone to crime.

I don't mean to insult the Christians on here by implying that "smart people are atheists" or that sort of drivel. However, as many of you know (if you have been involved in various churches) that since Christianity is the most socialy acceptible religion you certainly have bandwagoners galore who completely lack introspection and follow for followings sake; many would certainly claim Christianity only because it is expected of them and not because it has anything to do with personal conviction or belief, or because they have been emotionally manipulated into cathartic conversion experiences. (Kind of the same knee-jerk reaction you generally get if you ask someone if they "love democracy.")

You also have the factor that those who are agnostic or atheist (especially atheists) are those who report as being agnostic and atheist and not "non-religious" or some sort of thing. So you get the subset of people who are willing to report a fact despite social stigma. This also colors the various other shared traits that may have very little to do with the religion itself.

(Sigh) nooooooooooooooo man.

"appropriate address" means doing something about it. address the issue. appropriately. as in if your shits weak you say HEY - MY SHITS WEAK, SOMEBODY HELP ME.....

In any religion, life will force your hand and you'll find out if you truly are what you say you are or if your simply a social circle waiting to get devoured.

Laura and I teach marriage classes.

Bible based, for christians with problems.

and the fact is that sometimes our classes come up empty.

Now if your really willing to learn some stuff and do some hard work, I'll be willing to get in the trenches with you. that's half - of an appropriate address - being willing to help somebody carry a burdon.

[sinmantyx]

(Sigh) nooooooooooooooo man.

"appropriate address" means doing something about it. address the issue. appropriately. as in if your shits weak you say HEY - MY SHITS WEAK, SOMEBODY HELP ME.....

In any religion, life will force your hand and you'll find out if you truly are what you say you are or if your simply a social circle waiting to get devoured.

Laura and I teach marriage classes.

Bible based, for christians with problems.

and the fact is that sometimes our classes come up empty.

Now if your really willing to learn some stuff and do some hard work, I'll be willing to get in the trenches with you. that's half - of an appropriate address - being willing to help somebody carry a burdon.

OOOHHHHH! I see. I haven't heard it said quite like that before...perhaps "appropriate redress" but never "address"...hence my question.

The advice I give anyone who is going to get married is to make sure both you and your sponse understand what marriage means to you. What are your expectations of a spouse? Don't rely on someone else's expectations and definitions; instead seek those compromises and balances out with one another. I think it's the idealized, unrealistic fantasy of marriage that makes people unhappy. They think marriage will somehow MAKE them happy even if they can't be happy on their own; and they think a sponse has some sort of duty to be perfect and treat them perfectly; and somehow become super-human. I blame song lyrics. I even wrote a poem about it.

This may tie into the original author's ideas. If it is true that many conservative Christians (especially in certain areas of the country) rely on duty and social expectation, wouldn't it make sense that marriages may become troubled due to lack of examination of what marriage means to the individual and choice as to what a marriage is? The idealized prescribed view of marriage may then be a hinderance to the flexibility that a successful marriage requires; and difficulty in marriage may have more stigma attached to it because it could be seen as disobedience to these strict obligations.

[Steven]

OOOHHHHH! I see. I haven't heard it said quite like that before...perhaps "appropriate redress" but never "address"...hence my question.

The advice I give anyone who is going to get married is to make sure both you and your sponse understand what marriage means to you. What are your expectations of a spouse? Don't rely on someone else's expectations and definitions; instead seek those compromises and balances out with one another. I think it's the idealized, unrealistic fantasy of marriage that makes people unhappy. They think marriage will somehow MAKE them happy even if they can't be happy on their own; and they think a sponse has some sort of duty to be perfect and treat them perfectly; and somehow become super-human. I blame song lyrics. I even wrote a poem about it.

This may tie into the original author's ideas. If it is true that many conservative Christians (especially in certain areas of the country) rely on duty and social expectation, wouldn't it make sense that marriages may become troubled due to lack of examination of what marriage means to the individual and choice as to what a marriage is? The idealized prescribed view of marriage may then be a hinderance to the flexibility that a successful marriage requires; and difficulty in marriage may have more stigma attached to it because it could be seen as disobedience to these strict obligations.

IN fairness I can only reply to the Christian marriage thingy, which should go way way way beyond the idealistic self serving ideas of marriage and what it is supposed to be.

we've all talked alot about how many beleivers dont know much about what they beleive. thats true. If one were to explore the biblical model (a beleiver obviously) they'd find a great deal more than what seems to be so obvious on the surface. I find it interesting that so many married christians dont have a christian marriage.....(and Im not talking about morals here)...

[sinmantyx]

IN fairness I can only reply to the Christian marriage thingy, which should go way way way beyond the idealistic self serving ideas of marriage and what it is supposed to be.

we've all talked alot about how many beleivers dont know much about what they beleive. thats true. If one were to explore the biblical model (a beleiver obviously) they'd find a great deal more than what seems to be so obvious on the surface. I find it interesting that so many married christians dont have a christian marriage.....(and Im not talking about morals here)...

So "biblical marriage" isn't just reciting I Cor 13 on the ceremony?...and then getting shit-faced at the dance afterward?