This is what Jesus told me in bible, you're adulterer if you have lust in mind when seeing a woman.

Do you accept it?

Yes, which generally means that we better do some serious repenting...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH HOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHOH OHOHOHOHOHOHOHOHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAH AHAHHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHEHEHEEHEHEHEHEEHEHEHEH EHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE HEHEEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEH EHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA HAHHOHOHOHOHOHHOOHAHAHAHAHAHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHHAHAAHHH OHO COUGH COUGH GASP....PHEW!
What was the question again?:confused:

hehe
If you read the title of this thread using a meditaranean accent its sounds so funny.

this one time... at a seedy bar, i lusted after a fat woman. i had to hail mary my ass for a whole week to wash that sin away!

Originally posted by Saint
This is what Jesus told me in bible, you're adulterer if you have lust in mind when seeing a woman.

Do you accept it?

Lust is a natural instinct that has been distorted, perverted, exagerated by Fantasies, Illusion, that is what makes it sinful not the sexual desire.

I Disagree! Lust without Fantasy, Depravity and Utter Degradation is not Lust. Sexual Desire ie Lust is but God's Work. Therefore it is Holy! Those who Deny Lust, Deny God! Repent Ye Sinners! Embrace the Carnality that Life has to Offer!

Embrace that ass beyatch. Yiyah.

that too!

Right, that's why you should lust after men.

In Islam, god judges people by their ability to restrain from evil. In arabic, it's called, TAQWA......Feeling lust can not be avoided, Emotions can not be avoided for we are hardwired with these traits. it's just a feeling. Acting on the feeling is a different story because it imploys the free will which is soft coded for us. One may feel lust, love, hate, ect....but one acting on these emotion is the true grounds for judgement not the magnitude of the feeling but the reaction to these feelings.

Originally posted by spookz
I Disagree! Lust without Fantasy, Depravity and Utter Degradation is not Lust. Sexual Desire ie Lust is but God's Work. Therefore it is Holy! Those who Deny Lust, Deny God! Repent Ye Sinners! Embrace the Carnality that Life has to Offer!


I did not say lust was lust without the fantasy.

Lust is a natural instinct that has been adulterate, perverted by fantasy. A natural instinct is redefined, the name changes to lust because it has become perverted.

To must of good thing could be a bad thing.


The repletion of a lust Fantasies may create a conditioned response, compulsive desire, causing a person to have little control over their actions, to act on Impulse, without thought.

The Imagination of man's heart has caused man to do evil from his youth.

Here is something from an old book that I have.

Common Sense, How to use it.

By, Yoritomo-Tashi, Copyright , 1915

"Common sense rarely needs to strive; it unfolds itself in an atmosphere of peace, far from the tumult of abstractions and snares that are not easily avoided.

" common sense should be thus defined: " it is a central sense, toward which all impressions converge and unite in one sentiment- the desire for truth.

The Fight against Illusion.
Common sense, according to Yoritomo, is the absolute antithesis
of illusion, against which it struggles from the moment of contact.
" The man who allows himself to be influenced by vague dreams must, if he does not react powerfully, bid farewell to common sense and reason; for he will experience so great a charm in forgetting, even for one moment, the reality of life, that he will seek to prolong this blest moment. " he will renounce logic, whose conclusions are, at times, opposed to his desires, and he will plunge himself into that false delight of awakened dreams, or, as some say, day dreams.

Here is little short scenario I made up.

If a married man with children, and not wanting to leave his family fantasizes about other women creating a compulsive desire that he must act out then has an affair, falls in love, get a divorce, destroys his family.

The women he had an affair with had a family. The man is 55 years old the new women is 35 and has 3 kids 1, 10, and 12.

The man's 2 kids are 16 and 17 years old.

The Man had planned to retire in four years but now he is unable to because his ex wife will get half of his retirement and it is not enough to live on.

Oh I almost forgot, his new love is pregnant.

This is all because he chose to live in his imagination instead paying attention to reality and business.

If we are not careful living in our imagination, creating a world of delusion and fantasy, I can see us loosing control of what we choose to allow into our consciousness.

I can see were our Imagination can take on a life of its own
IT can become as though we were possessed by and Evil Spirit, an Entity, giving us direction.

Originally posted by Xev
Right, that's why you should lust after men.

I TOLD YOU she was lusting after me. I mean just look at here putting her booty in my face like that! Yowza!

:D

*runs away*

Sex is dirty only if it's done right.

I did not say lust was lust without the fantasy.

sure you did. see below

Lust is a natural instinct that has been adulterate, perverted by fantasy.

now when i Lust..."Man i wanna bend the Bitch over the Kitchen Sink and do her Good", the Fantasy is Inseparable from the Lusting (unless your Brain Dead)

you hold Lust to Operate in a Vacuum. how?

A natural instinct is redefined, the name changes to lust because it has become perverted

really? what was the Original Definition? a Blind and Frenzied, Zombified Rutting?

YEs, it is adultrey to lust, but not to the same degree if you actually sleep with someone who is married.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Feel lust for woman is sinful ?
This is what Jesus told me in bible, you're adulterer if you have lust in mind when seeing a woman.

Do you accept it?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What accept the word of a man who hung out in brothels?

I think Nikos Kazantzakis must have been right! Jesus was besides himself with lust over Mary Magdalen. Good thing he was able to sublimate desire with a few nails and a cross.

For those who "accept it" I suggest lashing ones penis with catoninetails, banging it between doors or sticking needles in the tiny pee hole. That will teach it!

Don't listen to a religion that tells you you can't lust for woman and adultery if this is how the bounds of man was percieved in.

Originally posted by spookz
I did not say lust was lust without the fantasy.

sure you did. see below

Lust is a natural instinct that has been adulterate, perverted by fantasy.
---------------------------------------

No I didn't see belowl

----------------------------------------------

A natural instinct is redefined, the name changes to lust because it has become perverted

really? what was the Original Definition? a Blind and Frenzied, Zombified Rutting?



Nothing wrong with a using your imagination, it is when your Imagination uses you that is the problem.

If you think compulsive desires that usurp your Freedom of Choice are a good thing that is your problem not mine.

Fantasy, Illusion, Lies, Delusion, guile, duplicity, does not dominate my Reality.

Compulsive behavior is not an act of Free Will.

What is the one common factor of serial killers?

Whatever the cause, at an early age they have turned inward to the Reality of Illusion, Fantasy, the Imagination.

The World of Illusion is a Living Hell, a dump, where hogs, rut for their pleasure in life, attempt to satisfy their perverted Instincts.

Originally posted by Dr Lou Natic
hehe
If you read the title of this thread using a meditaranean accent its sounds so funny.

Try it with an indian accent too, like Apu. :D

For those who "accept it" I suggest lashing ones penis with catoninetails, banging it between doors or sticking needles in the tiny pee hole. That will teach it!

They might get off on that.

If you read the title of this thread using a meditaranean accent its sounds so funny.

This whole thread is fucking hilarious.

To Wayne 98527:

I don't quite understand your reasoning. Why does lust or desire have to be compulsive? How does 'thinking' sexually about a woman become an act of sin?

You wrote:
Fantasy, Illusion, Lies, Delusion, guile, duplicity, does not dominate my Reality.

There is a difference between entertaining an erotic thought and lying, living in delusion, guile and duplicity.

You wrote: What is the one common factor of serial killers?
Whatever the cause, at an early age they have turned inward to the Reality of Illusion, Fantasy, the Imagination.

So do most writers, actors and film makers.

Imagination can be very healthy, it is the seed of creativity and innovation...and exquisite erotic literature too.

some said lust is the root of evil.
so, be austere in sex. :D

Theory:

The old religion described in Ugarit was the one the jews so hard tried to repress, all described quite thorughly in OT.

The old religion celebrated fertility and happieness. There are descriptions of priests and other people in lustfull sexorgies with a lot of wine and partying (talk about popular events hehe)

When the boring and evil priests of the jawhe-cult tried to repress this religion (probably to gain policital power over the region) they had to do the opposite to this religion. Instead of many gods, they merged them all in into one single god (but failed a bit) AND they had to call sex, wine and women sinful.

no, and it's lust for what isn't yours.

Lust is a natural process and there is nothing to be ashamed of. I don't beleive in any god, but I think the Judeo-Christians have a good idea. Animal lust removes idealism, it puts people back on animal level. I've seen enough sex-crazed stoners to realize the idiocy of this primitivism.

Well maybe the OT should pass on some help to the NT and remind priests not to lust after little boys in their sanctified state of celibacy.

Quote: "I think the Judeo-Christians have a good idea. Animal lust removes idealism, it puts people back on animal level."

Idealism: Behaviour or thought based on a conception of things as one thinks they Should be.

Ideal: Existing as an idea or model.
2.Thought of as perfect.
3. Existing only in the mind; Imaginary!

Originally posted by and2000x
Lust is a natural process and there is nothing to be ashamed of. I don't beleive in any god, but I think the Judeo-Christians have a good idea. Animal lust removes idealism, it puts people back on animal level.
You can not give your own definition to a word and make any sense even to yourself, that is called being irrational.

I've seen enough sex-crazed stoners to realize the idiocy of this primitivism.

------------------------------------------------------------------------


Lust is not natural, animals do not lust, only man is lustful

Lust.

1. intense sexual desire or appetite.
2. uncontrolled or illicit sexual desire or appetite;
lecherousness.
3. a passionate or overmastering desire or craving (usually
followed by for.

To lust for, sex is not lust. Take notice of overmastering desire
which means compulsive desire, lust meaning a sexual appetite that is out of Control.


" I've seen enough sex-crazed stoners to realize the idiocy of this primitivism. [/B][/QUOTE]



Again, animals do not lust.



Anyone that listens to a Space Cadet is as spacey as they are.
:eek:

>Lust is not natural, animals do not lust, only man is lustful

HAHA! I take it you have not worked with say.. horses or dogs. :)

Yeah really, what the hell do you mean they don't lust? I think it depends on the animal. Most marine life, as well as reptiles do not lust (that they show) However, mammals are extremely lustful (due to the evolution of their sex drive). Dogs, Lions, Chimps (Chimps are extremely horny!) are all lustful creatures! Haven't you ever had a dog try to hump your leg?

Idealism: Behaviour or thought based on a conception of things as one thinks they Should be.

I'm using it in a general sense, as in sacrificing distraction for a higher goal, such as building a cool building, or making a work of art, or crafting an ideal society.

Originally posted by and2000x
Yeah really, what the hell do you mean they don't lust? I think it depends on the animal. Most marine life, as well as reptiles do not lust (that they show) However, mammals are extremely lustful (due to the evolution of their sex drive). Dogs, Lions, Chimps (Chimps are extremely horny!) are all lustful creatures! Haven't you ever had a dog try to hump your leg?



Sorry but lust by nature is not animalistic, sex is not lust.
Sexual animals are not lustful.

Sex drive has nothing to do with lust.

The lust For Sex is a temporal problem not a physical problem.
Horny is not lustful, if it is natural to the beast.

Lust, unnatural Horniness created by the imagination, a lust for.

:eek:

The bible also says if you sin with a part of your body to remove it , for it is far worse to lose your soul, than to lose your body, So youd better go get a labotomy mr :mad:

then again.. I suppose that means a good deal of us would have to lose something else a little more personal :eek:

on a more serious note, to has sex with someone without marriage is a sin, which i suppose would be considered a form of lust, But then again if you had sex with every lady you lusted over or for there would probably be a string of fatherless children throughout the world, which is why we marry people i would say

This is what Jesus told me in bible, you're adulterer if you have lust in mind when seeing a woman.

Do you accept it?
No do I fuck. :D

I would say lust is something that should be kept private, or minimal at least (it is a social taboo for a good reason). Basically people shouldn't send out the message that lust is okay, especially when the reasons why it isn't okay, are known. Sending out this message will only encourage others into a 'sinful' way of living.

Jesus is speaking to married Pharisees otherwise he would have said fornication. If the inner desire of the heart is to seek pleasure than Jesus cannot be there. The problem that the Pharisees got into was that they did not let the Law enter their hearts but obeyed it externally while disobeying it internally. However for an unmarried man/woman to be attracted to each other is not lust . The problem is that men can become addicted to pornography, sex, etc. and in this way, the addiction can be more deadly than adultry.

Do you people, especially deep religious people think we are so different from animals? So we have so many properties that cant be applied on "animals".

Things Ive heard:
Animals don't have a soul
Animals can't feel pain
Animals can't think in logical chains
Animals can't use tools
Animals can't feel lust
Animals can't long for a friend

Why? Because we can't apply human feelings to an animal they say. I say this is complete bullshit!

I have worked as a pro trainer with horses for several years. I have long experience from both cats, dogs, sheaps...

I have ALSO quite long experience from group-logic in human behaivor, pedagogics for human AND animals, psycology behind animals etc..

I say: We are not that special. Im sorry you all who believe God created us so special and to use and abuse nature.

You go Robban! I know we are more animal than we would like to admit. It is an arrogance on our part to believe we are above and apart from our animal nature.

To all those out there who are worried about mans addiction to porn, sex, lust whatever:

Exactly where is this problem manifest and towards whom? I personally worry more about all those boring puritanical sorts who spend time suppressing any manifestation of lustful desire and then professing that as a reason to marry. *Shudders* Scary!

Sex is not the problem with lust it is the fantasy, the illusion,
the lies, the deception, the distorted, perverted, the adulterated Reality of the Imagination that is the sin.

Are you sure that you have control over your own thoughts.

Anxiety as an example is caused by graven images of Reality, Illusion, the thought process, the imagination that the person has no control over.

whoa! hold!

Maybe I am slow or stupid but I still can't find the problem related to sex in either form if its fysical, illution, fantasy or whatever.

Sexrelated problems is usually other problems. Lets say rape, aids, kiddieporn, trafficing etc... cant blame this on sex.

There can be a problem tho when you try to repress the sexual needs in a person. When a man forces himself to live in celebacy i think sertain psykological effects can occur on some individuals.
Hatred to women, the need to repress women..

Sex drive has nothing to do with lust.

Yes it does. In the mechanistic view of the universe, those creatures who lacked a high sex drive died off, making room for those creatures that were capable of cosntant reproduction. I thought this was simple philosophy here.

The pleasure and lust towards sex is a result of an extremely high sex drive. By that criteria, humans are extremely successful reproduction wise.

Originally posted by and2000x
Yes it does. In the mechanistic view of the universe, those creatures who lacked a high sex drive died off, making room for those creatures that were capable of cosntant reproduction. I thought this was simple philosophy here.

The pleasure and lust towards sex is a result of an extremely high sex drive. By that criteria, humans are extremely successful reproduction wise.
They also very succeful in rape.

You see, the "mechanistic view of the universe" doesn't exactly take morality into account, which is the reason lust can be problematic.

I agree with Roban here. A remember a particular catholic priest who encouraged his church members to go to strip clubs and masturbate. His reasoning was this: "All of these priests are complaining about how porn and sex and all this trash is corrupting our minds and destroying our families... yet the only people that are having problems are the little children who are getting raped by their priests, the same people who are telling us how evil it is! The church better get it's priorities straight. They would rather point their finger at another thing than deal with their own corruption."

They (are) also very succeful in rape.

Of course, that's why I stated that lust is counterproductive to a fluid society if a man doesn't have enough willpower to contain himself. Rapists are idiots and should be killed simply because it shows how incompetant at social conduct they are. Open the gas chambers.

>The pleasure and lust towards sex is a result of an extremely high sex drive. By that criteria, humans are extremely successful reproduction wise.

Erh well...

Humans can get a maximum of 1 baby per year in fertile age in theory. The amount of energy it takes to breed a baby is a lot.

Most people, even in the developement-countries have less than 15 children and now we talk about the whole lifespan.

The baby is completely helpless in several years. The human is not fertile until age of 12 - 15.

Most (other) animals breed 2 - 100 babies each year and the offspring can be fertile in just some month.

Yet we dominate this world completely.

>Open the gas chambers

Yeah yeah kill everyone.. thats a very simple solution to every problem. Why not commit a mass suicide and spare the planet from the worse plaige ever - humans.

As the machines stated in "the matrix". You are a virus.

I guess the question should be:

When does a normal attraction and adoration of an object turns into lust, is it the point when the person gotta have it to survive, because by this standard, the christians are lusting for Jesus.

Originally posted by and2000x
Yes it does. In the mechanistic view of the universe, those creatures who lacked a high sex drive died off, making room for those creatures that were capable of cosntant reproduction. I thought this was simple philosophy here.

The pleasure and lust towards sex is a result of an extremely high sex drive. By that criteria, humans are extremely successful reproduction wise.

You have it backwards, an extremely high sex drive in man is the
result of lust. Man would not survive without the help of his Imagination.

No doubt man can lust after a women sexually however Lust, an
overmastering desire, to have a yearning or desire; to have a
strong or excessive craving for, is a natural instinct that has been
distorted by the Imagination.

Syn. crave, hunger, covet, yearn.

Sexiness, to lust for is in the mind of the beholder.

Man is not a mere animal.
Mere Animals are born completely, fulfilled, developed, absolute in their being, nothing more or nothing less.

Man is born flawed, not completely, fulfilled, developed, not absolute, man is born less than but becomes more than a mere animal.

The Reality of Man's BE-ing is Boundless.

Man is not bound to the Chaos of the material world of Reality, the chaos of cause and effect, the law of the jungle, to kill or be killed, Evolution with its survival of the fittest.

Man as a material, physical, reality, is an incomplete BE-ing.

Man survives not because of his masculinity, sex drive, but because of his femininity.

The only Problem is Masculinity and Femininity are Misnomers.

:eek:

>Mere Animals are born completely, fulfilled, developed, absolute in their being, nothing more or nothing less.

Do you by this statement mean that animals do not as they live their lifes: grow stronger, learn to know and love individuals, gain experience and learn... ?

Yeah yeah kill everyone.. thats a very simple solution to every problem. Why not commit a mass suicide and spare the planet from the worse plaige ever - humans.

I never said that. I mean kill all idiots, let the strong and ingenius rule. I like the agents from Matrix, because they symbolize power, sophistication and intellect. They don't moralize the problem, they just remove it.



No doubt man can lust after a women sexually however Lust, an
overmastering desire, to have a yearning or desire; to have a
strong or excessive craving for, is a natural instinct that has been
distorted by the Imagination.

So now you admit that lust exists, however you no say that 'imagination' has distorted it. What religion are YOU wayne, because I am at a loss for your anti-naturalist philosophy.


Mere Animals are born completely, fulfilled, developed, absolute in their being, nothing more or nothing less.

No jew bag, they are not. Life is ripe with suffering, absurdity and purposeless cruelty. If animals are so complete, then explain why animals go extinct. I think a good reading of Schopenhauer might fix your brain.

, the christians are lusting for Jesus.

No shit, a religion of homosexual idol worshippers. It is an abomination to all things natural, growing, and beautiful. I will stand here and defend all human minds against this type of garbage. Christians place man above nature, they endorse the wholesale destruction of animalia in the hope that there is another unseen world beyond this one.

I usually use reason over emotion, but Wayne's ravings are beyond nonsense.

>I mean kill all idiots, let the strong and ingenius rule.

Ah.. well well well.. what have we here...

And what makes you think that you would survive that process? Your strong and ingenius intelect?

Because I'm the one who said it. If I don't it would not matter because I'd be dead.

> because I'd be dead

might be an ingenius idea after all...

Jenyar and 200x rape has absolutely not one thing to do with lustful sexual desire. Rape is about violence, humiliation and power.

Originally posted by and2000x


So now you admit that lust exists, however you no say that 'imagination' has distorted it.

What religion are YOU wayne, because I am at a loss for your anti-naturalist philosophy.
I usually use reason over emotion, but Wayne's ravings are beyond nonsense.
-------------------------------------------------------------------


I never said lust did not exist.
I never said lust was distort by the imagination.
What in the world did I say that makes me an anti-naturalist,
example please.


No wonder my ravings are nonsense to you.


"What religion are YOU wayne"

I am an atheist that believes in God.

Originally posted by wayne_92587
No wonder my ravings are nonsense to you.

hehe, ironic that you would put that right before this:

Originally posted by wayne_92587
I am an atheist that believes in God.

LOL

Originally posted by wesmorris
hehe, ironic that you would put that right before this:

LOL


An ATHEIST is one who denies the existence of a deity or of divine beings.


Could I believe that God is not a deity or divine being?

That God is a Word, but not a Name.

Originally posted by wayne_92587
Could I believe that God is not a deity or divine being?

Sure, you can redefine words to make them into things that support whatever type of ridiculous statement that you'd like - but it doesn't serve much purpose besides alienation of the other humans who halfass stick to the vernacular usage of words.

Originally posted by wayne_92587
That God is a Word, but not a Name.

Yes, but it's a word that generally means "deity" or "the abrahamic deity", etc. You're attempting to play a silly game of semantics. Please feel free, but don't be surprised if you're ridiculed. Do you see my point?

Quote: "Sex is not the problem with lust it is the fantasy, the illusion, the lies, the deception, the distorted, perverted, the adulterated Reality of the Imagination that is the sin.
Are you sure that you have control over your own thoughts.
Anxiety as an example is caused by graven images of Reality, Illusion, the thought process, the imagination that the person has no control over."

So Wayne if there is no way to control ones imagination then what is the point of controlling ones sexy lusty thoughts?

You still haven't explained what is the lie, deception, distortion and perversion.

What are the negative potentials of nursing a desire?

How do you sublimate these uncontrollable anxiety-ridden, perverted, distorted lust-filled fantasies? I am assuming you have suffered from lust since you seem convinced it is inherently sinful and prescription for disaster. Those comfortable with their lustful imagination see no reason to 'control' those thoughts.

Originally posted by wayne_92587
You have it backwards, an extremely high sex drive in man is the result of lust.

I'm sorry, but how would you back that up there wayne? I would theorize that "an extremely high sex drive" is generally biochemically based. If you have too much testosterone in combination with whatever else comprises your sex drive, you have a high sex drive. That makes you a lustfull fuckard who can't ever think of anything but sex.

You gotta be joking - thread topic!!! If we were not "meant" to do these things why did your "god" put hormones inside us????

Originally posted by Lucysnow
Quote: "Sex is not the problem with lust it is the fantasy, the illusion, the lies, the deception, the distorted, perverted, the adulterated Reality of the Imagination that is the sin.


Are you sure that you have control over your own thoughts.
Anxiety as an example is caused by graven images of Reality, Illusion, the thought process, the imagination that the person has no control over."

So Wayne if there is no way to control ones imagination then what is the point of controlling ones sexy lusty thoughts?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I did not say that we have no control over our imagination.

I said anxiety is an example of someone that has lost control of his or her Imagination.

We may or may not have control over the imagination.

Compulsive behavior, many times a person acts without thought in one particular situation because they have preconditioned themselves to act.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

You still haven't explained what is the lie, deception, distortion and perversion.

What are the negative potentials of nursing a desire?
--------------------------------------------------------------------

There is nothing negative about an individual nursing a desire
as long as the person remains in control and the desire does not end up nursing the individual.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How do you sublimate these uncontrollable anxiety-ridden, perverted, distorted lust-filled fantasies? I am assuming you have suffered from lust since you seem convinced it is inherently sinful and prescription for disaster.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course I have experienced lust, been Tempted by the Evil of my own my Imagination.

I do believe that it possible to be caught up in our imaginings causing our World of Reality to become a World of Illusion.

It is not difficult to turn inward to escape Reality.

The Imagination is both Good and Evil.

Another names for the Imagination is Pandora's Box and the Tree of Knowledge.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those comfortable with their lustful imagination see no reason to 'control' those thoughts.
-------------------------------------------------------
of course they don't.



How do you sublimate these uncontrollable anxiety-ridden, perverted, distorted lust-filled fantasies?

[/B][/QUOTE]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I simply say to myself, to my imagination, get thee behind me tempt not thy lord thy God.

I just Stop, end the thought.

Originally posted by wesmorris
Sure, you can redefine words to make them into things that support whatever type of ridiculous statement that you'd like - but it doesn't serve much purpose besides alienation of the other humans who halfass stick to the vernacular usage of words.

Yes, but it's a word that generally means "deity" or "the abrahamic deity", etc. You're attempting to play a silly game of semantics. Please feel free, but don't be surprised if you're ridiculed. Do you see my point?

I am not redefining words.

I am not the one that is playing silly games with semantics.

Religion has a problem with semantics, God is No Name.

Those that Babel-on about a named God speaks of a Graven Image of Reality.

God has no Name, God is Nameless, God is not a Name.

God if defined to be a person, place or thing is a False God, a Graven Image.

A deity, a divine character or nature, a Supreme be-ing that exists as a Reality does not mean that by definition this deity is a material, Physical Reality.

I an atheist relative to a named God.
I am not an atheist relative to the Reality of First Cause.
I am not an atheist relative to a nameless God.
I am an atheist relative to a Graven Image, a False God.

Anyone that speaks in the Name of God is a False Prophet.

That is the problem with semantics it is just so much Babel.

The Reality of First Cause can not be spoken of as though it existed as a material reality, to speak of is to Name, to define, to limit.

The Deity, God, the divine, the Spiritual, the Nameless Reality that Moses spoke to is not the Graven Image that is worshiped today by the World Religions.

Supreme BE-ing is not a material Reality, it is the divine nature of the Reality of First Cause.


Semantics is important in understanding the Reality of God.

Wayne I think you approach the body and the mind as an enemy, whereas I believe It should be embraced and integrated. To sublimate a thought is to channel it through a more useful medium of expression. Dante became obsessed with Beatrice and wrote the Divine Comedy (all that for a woman he met three times). Instead you write "I simply say to myself, to my imagination, get thee behind me tempt not thy lord thy God. I just Stop, end the thought." Can you not see how schizoid and neurotic an approach that is?

You treat these thoughts as if they are not a part of you and did not belong to you alone. You must not trust yourself very much.

Wayne, at the risk of an athiest misquoting the book you apparently hold so dear; did not your god create ALL life and matter? Therefore, and as he is also allegedly so omnipotent, he created man and woman to be attracted to each other. And, as a direct consequence, procreate accordingly. Now, in order to procreate there must be initial contact and attraction. This is done by the means of (hope this is right) pheromones, which chemically interact to form "attraction". Therefore, as this is a god made bodily function, what can possibly be the matter? In all people, these chemicals abound in different amounts - thereby increasing or decreasing sexuality. Some have such a high count that it can kick them off into becoming rapists etc. But to say that the enjoyment of looking at a woman is sinful (or vice versa), is bigotted and "human"...........

Rape has absolutely nothing to do with ones sexual drive. Rapists do not rape because they are filled with lust and high levels of testosterone.

MYTHS -- This section is excerpted from Rape in America, by Rob Hall .

"Sexual assault has nothing to do with sex.
Rape is a form of sexual assault and is an act of aggression. It is a crime of violence that uses sexuality as a weapon against the will of the victim. Sexual assault is a sexual act done to the victim. Rape is a sexual behavior done primarily to satisfy nonsexual desires.

*Myth* The rapist is most frequently a "sex starved" pervert.

The majority of convicted rapists did not rape out of sexual frustration, but for the emotional gratification they received from the act of sexual violence.

* Myth* A rapist is a man who cannot control his sexual desires.

Rape is most often a premeditated crime. It is an act of aggression and sexual violence, not an expression of sexual desire."

You may well be right, but when are experts ever right? ;)

Ahh Red Devil this is all boring...what do you say we go hang out in Porn star for California governor in Free thoughts?:D

Originally posted by Saint
This is what Jesus told me in bible, you're adulterer if you have lust in mind when seeing a woman.

Sheep are acceptable, though, right?


Right?:eek: Originally posted by Greco
Sex is dirty only if it's done right.

Unless you do it in a bath-tub filled with soapy water.

Lucy: if its with you, anytime babe!!

http://members.lycos.co.uk/mufcdevil/net/sheep.gif

Jenyar and 200x rape has absolutely not one thing to do with lustful sexual desire. Rape is about violence, humiliation and power.

If I sounded like I equated rape with sex drive I mis-worded myself. I have always agreed with the notion of rape=power over another, however scientists are recently arguing that the psychology of rape may have evolved within the human species as a method to force reproduction in unwilling populations. They did so by observing several cases of chimps raping other chimps (in which a fight to the death may occur afterwards.)

Any comments on the origin of rape?

That sounds interesting 2000X. Can you list a site?

and2000x, Lucysnow:
I believe the results were summarized in a book called "The Natural History of Rape".

If I sounded like I equated rape with sex drive I mis-worded myself. I have always agreed with the notion of rape=power over another, however scientists are recently arguing that the psychology of rape may have evolved within the human species as a method to force reproduction in unwilling populations.

This does avoid the issue of the interaction between libido itself and power. It may be a non-issue: as and2000x points out, the psychology of rape could have evolved as a means of forcing reproduction upon the unwilling. This does not invalidate the idea that the psychology of rape is strongly based upon the excersize of control over another.

This does not invalidate the idea that the psychology of rape is strongly based upon the excersize of control over another.

True, for power is usually the only motive for rape in modern times. When the Russians overtook Berlin at the closing of WWII, they raped nearly 2 million* women (and men and boys), including their own Russian women who were freed from the death camps. There was no purpose behind this but to humiliate and degrade, with no physical attraction necessarily involved. So there is no doubt it is a method to attain power over another, especially in prision, where men rape other men for the purpose of terrorizing them and affirming power.

That does sound like an interesting book (imagine the expression on someone's face is they saw me reading that :eek: )

I ponder if Rape is a subliminally triggered by reproductive urges or if it is only a method of torture. Does the book talk about this?

* My figures may be wrong, it could have been 200,000 or 12 million, I don't recall.

and2000x:
True, for power is usually the only motive for rape in modern times.

Or in any other time. Were the Sabine women a myth?
Of course explaining rape in terms of uncontrolled lust is simplistic. But to delve into the psychology of rape would expose psychological linkage of sex, power and death. It is much more comforting, and much less subversive, to blame overactive libido.

When the Russians overtook Berlin at the closing of WWII, they raped nearly 2 million* women (and men and boys), including their own Russian women who were freed from the death camps. There was no purpose behind this but to humiliate and degrade, with no physical attraction necessarily involved.

As to the statistics, I suspect it's an unknown. It's not something the Allies would have been thrilled about publicizing, yes?

I ponder if Rape is a subliminally triggered by reproductive urges or if it is only a method of torture. Does the book talk about this?

It's been quite some time since I read it, but I do not think so.

I think lust and power are inextricably linked. I don't think that the Russians raped that many woman but I suspect the source is here. http://www.rense.com/general19/redarmy.htm

Quote from Red Army article: "He appears to echo the American feminist Marilyn French's notorious claim that "in their relations with women, all men are rapists, and that's all they are".

It is statements like above that keep me from calling myself a feminist. Everyone is potentially anything under the right stresses, but to claim men are rapists and that's all they are is absurd.

Well come on Okinrus, you have yet to link lust with power. Give us your pearls...or turds.

Originally posted by and2000x
When the Russians overtook Berlin at the closing of WWII, they raped nearly 2 million* women (and men and boys), including their own Russian women who were freed from the death camps.
Those russian soldiers were mainly simple peasants and they were not that pervert to do such crimes of that scale. your reference might not be a right one.

dont underestimate the power the war has on the human mind. Simple peasants has always done horrible things in wartimes. Just look at what happened in jugoslavia

everno:
You're an idiot who knows nothing about WW2. The 'Rape of Berlin' is well documented.

Everneo: you apparently know very little about the Soviet advance into Berlin. One of my little hobbies on my domain is WW2 research. Plus I have served 17 years in the British Army, many of these in Germany, albeit not Berlin.

What the Russian soldiers did to the women folk (of all ages) in Berlin was sheer brutal wanton savagery. It was revenge on a massive scale and their leaders condoned it all. Women were killing themselves, if still alive at all, after what had been done to them. We are not talking about individual acts here but MASS rape of individuals who were left shredded on the rubble only to find another soldier following on behind and taking his own "revenge" on individuals. Many women fought like tigers only to be pinned down by soldiers whilst others exaxted their brutality and they were not gentle and they did not confine their activities to what is the normal if you see what I mean.

Many women chocked to death, others bled to death. Do I need to make it any more bloodily graphic????

Those russian soldiers were mainly simple peasants and they were not that pervert to do such crimes of that scale. your reference might not be a right one.

You also have to realize that these Russians, being the peasants they were, were driven fully by their hatred. Their families and villages were destroyed by the German invaders, so they were probably taking serious revenge. There is nothing that can pervert the mind more than war, so be careful when seeing history in terms of 'these are good guys' and 'these are bad guys'. Even America is responsible for many unspeakable atrocities.

Originally posted by Xev
You're an idiot who knows nothing about WW2.
Knowing nothing about WW2 does not make me an idiot and knowing something about WW2 does not make you less idiotic.

The 'Rape of Berlin' is well documented.
Antony Beevor's account from his research and others' put the estimate as from anything between 0.1 million and 2 million is simply too large to prevent the surviving germany asking for the blood of Stalin. Being such large scale victims why would the germans had to undergo the humiliation of being tried for war crimes by the tribunal instead of blaming the russians for the same.? USSR is not present now to tell the truth if they ever tell anything. A.Beevor's claim of Soviet state archives documents recording the rape accounts(!) clearly shows either they were cooked up to sataisfy Stalin or the claim is a bluff to disgrace the soviets.


Professor Oleg Rzheshevsky, head of war history at the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow, told BBC News Online these were grave accusations which were not supported by documentary evidence.

Professor Rzheshevsky, who admitted he had only read excerpts and had not seen the book's source notes, said: "Information on the number of raped and killed women is based on victims' and witnesses' accounts, some excerpts from interviews and other such sources."

He said Mr Beevor's use of phrases such as "Berliners remember" and "the experiences of the raped German women" were more suitable for pulp fiction, than scientific research.

Professor Rzheshevsky said considering what the German Army had done in the Soviet Union the Germans could have expected an "avalanche of revenge".

'Humane soldiers'

But he said that did not happen and added: "The majority of soldiers and officers of the Soviet Army and the allied armies treated the local population humanely."


Stalingrad was the turning point on the Eastern Front

The professor said 4,148 Red Army officers and many privates were "punished" for committing atrocities.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1939174.stm

"Already, the civilian population was bearing the brunt of the Red Army's revenge. Though the first wave of Soviet troops was generally considered to be disciplined, it was the second that indulged in orgies of rape and violence, fuelled by large stocks of alcohol found in the city."

Its easy to hang the mad dog, given enough time. so was blaming a second wave of soviet troops.


If the soviets really did that and trying to justify that for revenge I won't hesitate to correct myself & join your chorus and call Stalin a devil if someone confirmed the figures from reliable sources. BTW, I have no love for such commies / stalinist thugs. Blaming the entire Germany for the deeds of Nazis is not justifiable in case the allied made no effort to unearth the truth.

Red Devil :

You are welcome to provide reliable sources/refereces to enlighten me.

Me being doubting thomas is not because of any indifference to Germans' suffereing but knowing well about anti-soviet proboganda by the West. Me, on no account pro-soviet.

Everneo: Sorry cannot provide anything at present as I am on permanent nights, for about 3 weeks, 50 miles from home. But I will endeavour to find something when I get some time off - maybe September!!! :rolleyes:

I did not think of your post being anti soviet and anti anything, just, to my mind, ill informed somewhat.

Red Devil,

i am not anti soviet or anti anything, ofcourse. being a british soldier worked in germany and well informed to call me illinformed why should you wait for going home to provide something.?!! ;)

may be you know of some first hand accounts of those alleged atrocities. but the sheer number is baffling me.

Originally posted by and2000x
You also have to realize that these Russians, being the peasants they were, were driven fully by their hatred. Their families and villages were destroyed by the German invaders, so they were probably taking serious revenge. There is nothing that can pervert the mind more than war, so be careful when seeing history in terms of 'these are good guys' and 'these are bad guys'. Even America is responsible for many unspeakable atrocities.
yeah, i agree with your analysis. the revenge part includes destruction, ransacking and taking away the german material resources to devastated russia, etc. but such mass raping could not easily be pushed under the carpet just as a revenge by the rest of the world. or may be i underestimated drunk peasants and mistook them for 'good guys'.!?! let me double check while waiting for further input.

Originally posted by everneo
Red Devil,

i am not anti soviet or anti anything, ofcourse. being a british soldier worked in germany and well informed to call me illinformed why should you wait for going home to provide something.?!! ;)

may be you know of some first hand accounts of those alleged atrocities. but the sheer number is baffling me.

You have to understand I am on a works pc, this does not have the facilities nor the search engines I use on it. Far different from home where I am the boss!!

You would be amazed by how much of history is 'covererd up', especially dealing with the soviets. To this day we are still finding horrible things about them, such as the mass graves under the berlin wall.


Here are some website about the 'rape of berlin':

Testimony from real victims:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4446716,00.html

Documents:

http://mars.vnet.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/berlin/lectures/21RapeofBerlin.html

http://www.systems.org/HTML/signals/volume2/v_2-i_4/war-rape.htm

Book on Fall of Berlin:

http://btobsearch.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?sourceid=00393841934349639524&btob=Y&pwb=1&ean=9781568523330

everno:
yeah, i agree with your analysis. the revenge part includes destruction, ransacking and taking away the german material resources to devastated russia, etc. but such mass raping could not easily be pushed under the carpet just as a revenge by the rest of the world.

Nor was it. This is a well known historical fact.

or may be i underestimated drunk peasants and mistook them for 'good guys'.!?! let me double check while waiting for further input.

*Raises an eyebrow*
Since when were there "good guys" in war?

Originally posted by Xev
everno:

Nor was it. This is a well known historical fact.

That allegged million strong mass rape is not 'a well known historical fact', even for Antony Beevor, a military historian and author of "Berlin: The Downfall 1945". - 2002

"Mr Beevor said he was shocked by what he found during his research of German and Soviet archives."
reproducing the link again : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1939174.stm

His claims were disputed by Russian military historians.

Rapes committed by rogues happen in most of the wars. The dispute here is on the figures in millions.

*Raises an eyebrow*
Since when were there "good guys" in war?
since the time when 'good guys' preferred to war rather than slavery / aggression.

The figures come from hospital reports, if you bothered to read my links. Frankly I don't think the figures matter, since it did happen, and matters not if it 200 women or 200 trillion women. I've heard the same story told by one of the soviet tank generals (whose name escapes me). Much of the red army that invaded that day were not trained officers but criminals released from jail...that should give you a good idea about what it was like.

From Berlin woman: "The next morning, we women proceeded to make ourselves look as unattractive as possible to the Soviets by smearing our faces with coal dust and covering our heads with old rags, our make-up for the Ivan." http://www.ibiscom.com/berlin.htm

Originally posted by and2000x
The figures come from hospital reports, if you bothered to read my links.
Did you bother to read the links you provided.?

"Some 90,000 women sought medical treatment as a result of being raped. "
http://mars.vnet.wnec.edu/~grempel/courses/berlin/lectures/21RapeofBerlin.html

The source of this link is a book that is out of print.
"Source: Anthony Read and David Fisher, Berlin Rising: The Biography of a City (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1994). This book is out of print."



"Medical experts estimated the total number of rapes at between 20,000 and 100,000; "
http://www.systems.org/HTML/signals/volume2/v_2-i_4/war-rape.htm

This one is from the book of historian Cornelius Ryan. Though the author is famous he took the estimates claimed to be from medical experts which vary from 20,000 to 100,000. Hospital reports are supposed to be accurate atleast upto few thousands.

Frankly I don't think the figures matter, since it did happen, and matters not if it 200 women or 200 trillion women.
Though i asked for justification for the figure in millions, it does not matter whether it is 20,000 or 1 trillion what matters is the more the number the more the possibility of exposure of the crime to the world and more the necessity to substantiate the figures.

I've heard the same story told by one of the soviet tank generals (whose name escapes me). Much of the red army that invaded that day were not trained officers but criminals released from jail...that should give you a good idea about what it was like.
Stalin himself told this in an arrogant justification of the rapes and attrocities in Berlin. They replinished the red army with criminals in jail. peasant criminals..??

From Berlin woman: "The next morning, we women proceeded to make ourselves look as unattractive as possible to the Soviets by smearing our faces with coal dust and covering our heads with old rags, our make-up for the Ivan." http://www.ibiscom.com/berlin.htm
Rapists don't see the face, man.! if they were up to revenge. The Ivans supposed to had raped 10 years to 80 years old, remember..??!! who is telling truth..?!!

oh, what an enlightening discussion is this..!!!:rolleyes:

evernoe:
That allegged million strong mass rape is not 'a well known historical fact', even for Antony Beevor, a military historian and author of "Berlin: The Downfall 1945". - 2002

I did not say that it was a million strong. But every book I've read on the close of the European theatre of WW2 mentions the rape of Berlin.

This one is from the book of historian Cornelius Ryan. Though the author is famous he took the estimates claimed to be from medical experts which vary from 20,000 to 100,000. Hospital reports are supposed to be accurate atleast upto few thousands.

Since when did women seek hospital attention immediately after being raped? Even in more enlightened times, many don't and simply hide it from shame.
Only the worst cases are going to be reported.
Furthermore, even if she overcomes the shame of being raped by a filthy, brutal peasant, who is she going to tell? The Red Army?
-Laughs-
Or maybe the Allies? Yeah fucking right.
Statistics are going to be somewhat blurred.

since the time when 'good guys' preferred to war rather than slavery / aggression.

Ah, egalitarian rapists. How...touching.
Point is, war is hell. Even a 'justified war'. And often the distinction between the goodies and the baddies is just a matter of who is worse.

Rapists don't see the face, man.! if they were up to revenge. The Ivans supposed to had raped 10 years to 80 years old, remember..??!! who is telling truth..?!!

So, what? The average female citizen of Berlin is suddenly Susan fucking Brownmiller? Get a grip.

Originally posted by Xev
evernoe:

get a grip
Since when did women seek hospital attention immediately after being raped?
ask who relied on hospital reports.

Statistics are going to be somewhat blurred.
yeah, blurred too much.



Ah, egalitarian rapists. How...touching.
Point is, war is hell. Even a 'justified war'. And often the distinction between the goodies and the baddies is just a matter of who is worse.
waste to talk about 'good guys'. lets talk about rapists.



So, what? The average female citizen of Berlin is suddenly Susan fucking Brownmiller? Get a grip.
grip of what.?

why there is 'fucking' between Susan and Brownmiller.? accustomed to drop the fucking in the middle.?:D

Originally posted by Xev
Since when did women seek hospital attention immediately after being raped? Even in more enlightened times, many don't and simply hide it from shame. Only the worst cases are going to be reported.

Those that survived the ordeal, many many died as a direct result of the brutality.

I think we have to be really careful here. I simply don't trust germans and this may be part of their agenda. 2000 or so, but 2 million is doubtful.

:eek:

Oh yeah, those German folk are all the same. (end sarcasm)

Basing trust on nationality is abominably ignorant. I recommend that you base your trust/mistrust of Mr Beevor on something more rational (like reading his work, perhaps?)

as an on-topic thing, didn't Jesus say that lusting after your neighbors wife in your mind was just as much a sin as actually having sex with her?

this is a very different thing than saying that lust in general is sinfull.

Originally posted by Saint
This is what Jesus told me in bible, you're adulterer if you have lust in mind when seeing a woman.

Do you accept it?

Bah this must be the lamest excuse ever why dont you just say it like it is, you're GAY!
If you ..... a bah forget it you gay homesexual

no its natural instinct.