Swinging: Right or wrong?

Is swinging right or wrong?

  • Yes!!

    Votes: 4 9.8%

  • No!!

    Votes: 5 12.2%

  • Each to they're own!!

    Votes: 32 78.0%
  • Total voters
    41
  • Poll closed .
Meursalt said:
No.

It's right up there with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.
"You can take anything you want.. provided I approve."

Setting a limit on participation, once the decision is made to participate, is about control, power. Not sex.
Or apples.
Click to expand...

I think that some control over one's environment is good. Power can mean many things, not all of them bad. Anyway, regardless of what you think, I don't think there's anything wrong with having -some- control over what my sexual partners do and don't mind that they have some over mine. Things like stds are a definite concern, but it's certainly not the only concern. By control, I only mean it in the sense if they would like to stay in a relationship with me just as the same applies if I would like to stay in a relationship with them.


Meursalt said:
*Aside - if you don't like my toilet paper, then don't wipe your arse with it.
Click to expand...

You seem to be implying that your discourse is akin to your toilet paper; that is, good for only one thing. I'm not so harsh on your arguments, but as I said, they can indeed be abrasive at times :p.
 
Last edited:
codanblad said:
if its participation in sexual activities, then it all depends on what the person defines as sexual. maybe they see oral sex as a very affectionate physical gesture, like a massage or a back scratch. so its black and white to them too.

Upon mention of adam and eve, i can't resist making a contribution: "god made the world perfect...except for the evil apple tree. and he made people perfect... except they wanted to commit evil. and he made the angels perfect... except for satan and his followers."
Click to expand...

This is why I simply don't believe in this christian God. I simply can't believe that God is perfect; perhaps he could have a 'good' side and a 'bad' side (the old God/devil dichotomy), but to say that a perfect God would create imperfect creatures, to me, is a logical fallacy.
 
Meursalt said:
Setting a limit on participation, once the decision is made to participate, is about control, power. Not sex. .
Click to expand...

That's correct. But most relationships these days seem to be about control. People manipulate you to find out how far they can use/abuse you.
 
S.A.M. said:
Meursalt said:
Setting a limit on participation, once the decision is made to participate, is about control, power. Not sex.
Click to expand...

That's correct. But most relationships these days seem to be about control. People manipulate you to find out how far they can use/abuse you.
Click to expand...

I think different people have different standards for what constitutes abuse. Perhaps the best way to put it is that the people with the highest standards have the least amount of palatable options.
 
Only religion says swinging is wrong. Isn't that one of the reasons Caesar adopted Christianity?
 
jayleew said:
Only religion says swinging is wrong. Isn't that one of the reasons Caesar adopted Christianity?
Click to expand...

I believe you're thinking of another roman emperor: Constantine. Why does Chistianity have such an aversion to sexuality? I'll theorize a bit here: sexuality can be seen as a divider; it can be a strong factor in the initiation of wars, such as that of Troy. I have a strong feeling that there's more to it then this, but I can't place my finger on it just yet... I think I remember hearing something about the church not wanting their congregations to focus too much energy in sexual relationships, as that would take away from the energy they would have for the church.. perhaps someone can help me out here.
 
scott3x said:
I believe you're thinking of another roman emperor: Constantine. Why does Chistianity have such an aversion to sexuality? I'll theorize a bit here: sexuality can be seen as a divider; it can be a strong factor in the initiation of wars, such as that of Troy. I have a strong feeling that there's more to it then this, but I can't place my finger on it just yet... I think I remember hearing something about the church not wanting their congregations to focus too much energy in sexual relationships, as that would take away from the energy they would have for the church.. perhaps someone can help me out here.
Click to expand...

Well, the Christians get this idea you are talking about from Paul. In a nutshell, Paul says he has nothing against marriage, but thinks of it as a distraction and not for him. Marriage, in the Christian context, is partly to satiate desire. So, he says that is hard for some people to be celebate, and he understands that. But, the desire is a distraction, so it is better to be married and have sex, than to be destracted by it. Another interesting thing he says in the passage is to have sex all the time (with your married partner)and break only to have prayer.

Fundamental Catholic churches are the biggest sticklers for their priests to be celebate, clearly disregarding the other part of Paul's lecture about celebacy.
 
jayleew said:
Well, the Christians get this idea you are talking about from Paul. In a nutshell, Paul says he has nothing against marriage, but thinks of it as a distraction and not for him. Marriage, in the Christian context, is partly to satiate desire. So, he says that is hard for some people to be celebate, and he understands that. But, the desire is a distraction, so it is better to be married and have sex, than to be destracted by it. Another interesting thing he says in the passage is to have sex all the time (with your married partner)and break only to have prayer.

Fundamental Catholic churches are the biggest sticklers for their priests to be celebate, clearly disregarding the other part of Paul's lecture about celebacy.
Click to expand...

They also ignore the more important part of Pual's speach, the fact that he had given it as a widower and grandfather. He'd already had his time in the fun.
 
scott3x said:
I believe you're thinking of another roman emperor: Constantine. Why does Chistianity have such an aversion to sexuality? I'll theorize a bit here: sexuality can be seen as a divider; it can be a strong factor in the initiation of wars, such as that of Troy. I have a strong feeling that there's more to it then this, but I can't place my finger on it just yet... I think I remember hearing something about the church not wanting their congregations to focus too much energy in sexual relationships, as that would take away from the energy they would have for the church.. perhaps someone can help me out here.
Click to expand...

the church takes sex away from people so it has something to offer them. you want sex you gotta come pay us to marry you. you can't use contraception, else how will we make money from christenings etc. and how will we have a fresh supply of children to brainwash.
 
codanblad said:
scott3x said:
I believe you're thinking of another roman emperor: Constantine. Why does Chistianity have such an aversion to sexuality? I'll theorize a bit here: sexuality can be seen as a divider; it can be a strong factor in the initiation of wars, such as that of Troy. I have a strong feeling that there's more to it then this, but I can't place my finger on it just yet... I think I remember hearing something about the church not wanting their congregations to focus too much energy in sexual relationships, as that would take away from the energy they would have for the church.. perhaps someone can help me out here.
Click to expand...

the church takes sex away from people so it has something to offer them. you want sex you gotta come pay us to marry you. you can't use contraception, else how will we make money from christenings etc. and how will we have a fresh supply of children to brainwash.
Click to expand...

Surely it can't be this bad...
 
John99 said:
you want me to find where someone put it in writing? how stupid.

just like your other comment, taken from thin air.
Click to expand...

What, are you saying you are the authority of morality? Without reasoning, there is no morality.

My statement was that only religion (religious text) states that swinging is wrong. I believe that is fact, unless you can prove me wrong.

How can anyone obtain ethics without learning them from a person and adopting or assimilating the system?

I am only asking you, where are you getting your system of ethics, which states that swinging is wrong? Your parents? Your brother? Where did they get their reasons from?

I believe you will find the root is religious teaching.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top