| |
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/25/2006 2:21:14 PM | | When you start looking at women as objects then the chance to ruin your abilty to have one on one lovemaking is there. you cant make love to a thing and nudity reduces women to things in most mens eyes. and so intamacy (sorry about my speling i had a 3.86 gpa in college just to many gigs. i read and write music well though rofl) | |
|
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/25/2006 8:11:41 PM |
Ummm, I'm not religious and I don't believe in the bible at all. Please stop using biblical references to prove a point. It doesn't roll that way where I'm from
Where would you suggest they quote from? The book of Sin. This is a religious forum thread. There is nothing wrong with nudity in the privacy of your home. | |
|
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/25/2006 8:41:04 PM | Now I thought all you christians out there believed you were created in god's image? Well, wether you consider "creation" to start inutero or at birth, you were created naked!
So, it stands to reason then that god is naked! | |
|
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/25/2006 8:48:31 PM | “What is Wrong with Nudity?’
In the heavenly kingdom – there is nothing wrong with nudity. BUT here on earth – it is a different story. This world is our second chance for redemption. What we do here counts. If a particular thing we do - contributes to something evil (even passively) – then we could be responsible for it.
In other words – we are responsible for our actions as well as for our intentions and not to mention any evil domino effect that we may cause to initiate.
In simple words – if a naked women walks on the street with an absolute clear conscious and no evil intentions then – she could still be liable for any evil thoughts she may unknowingly instigate within the mind of a lusting guy and vice versa. At the same time – it is important to note that – if the damage she may or may not passively cause is ‘insignificant’ then she will not be punish for her unintentional behavior.
Let me give you a simple example. Let’s compare a pretty woman’s state of nakedness with a million dollars in cash. If you have a million dollars in cash – would you go and sit on the sidewalk at 3 o’clock in the morning in a bad neighborhood with your million dollars laid out in front of you? Wouldn’t you be asking to be mugged? Wouldn’t everyone call you crazy or insane? Is it not your responsibility to protect your well being and your money – so that someone don’t get evil ideas in his head and decides to take advantage of you and commit a crime to take your money away from you?
Would you only blame that thug for mugging you, or would you also blame yourself for being stupid to sit on the street with your million dollars laid out in front of you?? Now, similarly everyone is asked to protect his or her assets. It is foolish to give people evil ideas that may cause them to mug you or rape you. Of course that thug's crime is huge compare to your stupidity, but you are also responsible for not playing it safe. This is a vicious world. We are here to prove a point. This world is our punishment (not that Adam and Eve’s forbidden story) but for an earlier incident. Here, we are asked to lead a righteous life before we are allowed to make it back to heaven.
In heaven, we will not be subjected to any evil eyes. Everyone will be totally contented there. God will be directly involved and wouldn’t let anything bad happen to anyone. Things that are not okay in this world – will be okay there.
If the outcome of something you say or do – does not anger God and does not harm anyone or anything (actively or passively) – then it is not a sin. In God’s immediate kingdom – God will make sure – our words or actions do not harm anyone. That’s why we could get drunk and drive naked (if we want to) and it won’t be a sin because we won’t be hurting anyone. But, that is NOT the case here on earth. Here, our words or actions can cause someone to be hurt (physically or mentally) or we could easily contribute our share to instigate something evil. If we do - then we could be responsible for it to a certain degree. However, God will look at intentions. If a naked girl’s intention was not to make guys lust at her or if she was not trying to take advantage of them by playing with their minds – then she could be forgiven. If you don’t intend to cause an oil-spill then you could be technically forgiven – but if birds and fishes die and you ruin the environment – then the blame has to go somewhere. So, why take chance by unintentionally causing an oil spill?
However, there is nothing wrong with nudity between legitimate couple. Sins will be measured in direct proportion to the damage it produces. If damage were not present or minimal then sin would not be there or would be minimal as well.
However, if a girl has a boyfriend but she gets naked in front of another man – then she could be hurting the feelings of her boyfriend. So, then it definitely becomes a sin and thus wrong.
A person can watch naked girls online and enjoy it and limit any damage to his own self. But if it causes him to go out and rape someone or do something offensive - then his sin could technically be shared by those instigators (naked girls online) for their contribution for the initial thought that may have triggered the action. It is the domino effect; everything is connected. Everyone involved will share the burden of a sin to his or her direct proportional contribution to the manifestation of that sin.
In short:
Some kind of damage caused = Sin
No damage caused to anyone = No sin.
It is that simple!
 | |
|
chinua
|
Joined: 9/30/2005
Msg: 31 | |
| |
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/25/2006 11:27:16 PM | There is nothing wrong with nudity.
On the other hand, do you people really want an unobstructed view of my back hair?
Would you want to take the bus with everyone au naturel?
*shudders* | |
|
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/26/2006 10:58:25 AM | True Mister right, the seats in my local cinema are manky enough without skidmarks and slug trails and pubic hair being left on them as well!
Plus I'm from Scotland, nudity in places where things fall of if yoi leave them exposed for more than a few minutes. is never a good idea! lol  | |
|
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/27/2006 1:39:03 PM | | We are trained to be ashamed of our sexuality by most of our religions and by our societies in general. This is a function of control. We are animals and our instict is to breed. we can't have unlimited breeding so we control the way people think...most succumb to the conditioning. | |
|
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/27/2006 7:43:24 PM | I think the origional poster answered his question when he asked,
Why don't we extend to newly shaven Sheep and Cats (who shaves thier cat ? ) this idea that they can't appear in public naked.
Well, poster...frankly...that's why they have fur -- it's thier "coat". Now, we happen to be naked apes. We don't have that nice built in fur. We do have it on our head for some reason, and between our legs and under our arms and on out legs,....I think we lost it over time !
I don't really want to live in a society where everyone is naked. I don't want anyone to see my cellulite and my stretchmarks. And frankly, most women arent pressing this. Men just cover thier ass and front.
Hey, I don't understand what the thing is about male frontal nudity ??? Go figure. In Playgirl, they never have erections !!! WHATS with that ???? I mean it's a dirty magazine of men with NO ERECTIONS. THAT IS SSSSSSSSOOOOOOO SEXIST toward women.
I don't know about you, but that doesn't seem very sexy.....Some guy just lounging (they are always lounging in those pics !) and he has this little snausage just laying there. Little shrivelled up limp biskit....! What's with that. Now, this is a much more reasonable sexist issue we should be looking at. Okay, it's been going on and on and on....somehow women aren't supposed to have fun with sex. It's in the news today...the number of female circumcisions (or mutilations) and even happening in this****y.
See, and worse the issue of "male permissions"....like men fooling around, but boy, they don't want you to go out. I was discussing this with my mother today. Male permissions...to be an a-hole at women, as if that is okay. It's sexism. I mean, i you said, Well you can be an a-hole because you are white -- to blacks, it would be a riot. But whats with the male permissions to be a jerk to women !!!!!?????
Now, men can go without a shirt in public -- but not women. Still, most women wouldn't do that -- because they need a bra or thier tits swing after 21. ANd you know what ? It hurts !!! We like out bras frankly. I like really nice ones myself. Most Americans look like fat Buddhas naked......who wants to see that anyway. Plus, the men wouldn't be able to hide erections.....and if we were all naked.....that would happen all the time. THAT is one reason we stated wearing clothes.....because that would happen. THINK about it.
You are in a group in public naked and you see a hot chick...or even your mother or aunt or sister, and BOING. Then they know what you are thinking.....and there is where the shame issue came from ! Instantly, you would feel ashamed and have no privacy in your thoughts.
EVEN in African cultures they cover thier wee wee. What I think is really cool is when they wear those wooden things that make thier d-ck look really big -- and they do those male fertiltity dances, and then the women dance. I think fertility celebrations are the most honest expression of love for life and GOD> the name JHVH or YHWH comes from an early Chaldean word referring to the constellation of the bear, the ash tree (or what the Teutonics called the World Tree, which is identified in most cultures differently), but especially --- YHVH......refers to the passion of life -- like two young lovers, bubbling up like effervesence.
God's name -- is really his/her nature (as are many names in Hebrew) and it means LIFE ENERGY and passion to create and exist. That energy in us is centrally expressed through --- fertility, making love, and children. I think that's wonderful. And you know what....that ritual is what most of us are doing now....POF is really a "fertility ritual" in our technological age. THAT is why a lot of us are in this website, and this is our ritualistic expression of our fertility and communication and exploration in that direction. Cool we can engage that with people all over the world here. Neat. Also, you can do it half naked....like me in my robe here.  I think we should return to the ancient rituals -- like people who do those drum circles....dance under the moonlight and howl. | |
|
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/27/2006 8:14:21 PM |
In Playgirl, they never have erections !!! WHATS with that ????
In playboy they do not have anything that is hugely explcit either. That is just the playboy/girl way, its not hardcore. There anre hundreds of hardcore man only magazines out there if you want them, just as there are hundreds of women only magazines.
In todays society, anything you want can be provided for. Mostly you have to be in the right place and time for it, but you can still get anything you want. You want to see male erections, just buy ladies hardcore mags, you want to be naked and free without any sexual influence, go to a nudist camp or beach.
Everything is avaliale if you go the right sources. Nudity is fast becoming something that people no longer think of as wrong, but instead think of as inconvienent (for reason like the prevous poster mentioned.) and impractical. | |
|
FOR U
|
Joined: 9/16/2006
Msg: 37 | |
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/27/2006 9:05:30 PM | | Is nudity wrong? Well...it seems bible scholars believe and found evidence that the first created beings....Adam and Eve....had a ora around them for protection from the elements of nature....sun...wind...When they chose to partake of the fruit....a test....and failed....being tempted...they lost the covering....the ora that surrounded their bodies..something of beauty and important. In that instant they realized they were naked and shame set in. This was not a concern before. The Creator had to kill an innocent animal and cover their nakedness with it's skin. If being naked was acceptable to God and each other...why kill an innocent animal and cover it? The only "ora" that seems to be left is around our heads. So...if certain parts of our bodies stir and feed our sexualities ....the result is what? No brainer! Take a nudist beach...the young boys and girls feel they are in a candy store..not to mention the adults. It stirs and gives us a sexual appitite. It's natural but it's also dangerous to go around showing PRIVATE parts to the PUBLIC. Some things in life should be PRIVATE.....don't you think......gee. To be policically correct they could pass a law that states only pretty bodies can be naked and ugly ones should be covered up.....right. | |
|
FOR U
|
Joined: 9/16/2006
Msg: 38 | |
| |
FOR U
|
Joined: 9/16/2006
Msg: 39 | |
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/27/2006 9:14:51 PM | | There are many professors that don't believe God or the bible but will confirm that nakedness in public is not right.......good.....or acceptable. And they do not quote bible passages. So where is your arguement towards them. Or are they just NARROW minded. People seem to accept whatever they want and that is their personal choice......but that does not make it right. Just because alcohol is legal does not make it good...........if grass was legal ...that does not make it right...if the majority accepts a standard of behaviour or whatever......that also does not make it right or good. Common sense tells us that........people are throwing out logic and replacing it with ignorance. Sad. There seems to be no leaders and only followers.......but hey......you have a free will to chose what you want. There has to be a normal...........bar or standard or else ..........do whatever feels good to you. Think about the teen agers growing up right now..........they have been desensitized with sex....violence....and free thinking.......very sad. Thanks for this forum. | |
|
FOR U
|
Joined: 9/16/2006
Msg: 40 | |
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/27/2006 9:20:37 PM | | Yes we were born naked........logic.....but we do not leave this sphere naked ...right...wonder why. Being created in God's image does not mean physically. It means we are three..........like He is........GOD....SOUL.....JESUS.....BODY.....HOLY SPIRIT....POWER.......WE ARE SOUL...PERSONALITY.....BODY....PHYSICAL.....SPIRITUAL...THAT WHICH UNDERSTANDS SPIRITUAL THINGS............WE ARE CREATIVE........FREE WILL..........WE HAVE A CONSCIENCE...those are the ways we were created in His image........thanks.....oops..capital letters.......sorry........forgot..........oops.!!! | |
|
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/27/2006 9:53:55 PM | Oh wow... I'm surprised this is even really a question of debate.
If we're talking about what the Bible says, no, nudity is not morally wrong. Our bodies are a beautiful creation by God and should be revered and loved. At least that's what the Catholic Church teaches.
HOWEVER, if you mean PUBLIC nudity, that is a cultural thing!!!
In some places like Africa, it's normal to be nude or at least partially nude. There was a tribe in this one place where the women where they wore no shirts or bras or anything. A missionary was astonished so she mailed them all t-shirts to cover themselves. The women sent a photo of them wearing the shirts and thanking her for the generous gift, and in the photo, they had cut holes for their breasts in the shirts so they would still be exposed!
The real question is how do you perceive nudity: culturally and personally. There is nothing inherently wrong with being nude, BUT, if you find yourself looking lustfully at someone who is nude, then, knowing yourself, you ought not to! In North America, culturally we're not used to nudity like in that tribe I explained earlier. We have also so objectified people so as to convert them into something plastic, so that we can be moulded into the "perfect image" we idolize.
In conclusion, public nudity should be legal/illegal based on the cultural norms. And I think that for most or all of us discussing on this forum, we're all in the areas in which nudity is not a cultural norm. | |
|
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/27/2006 9:59:13 PM | | Nakedness take great courage, the great Sannyas of India would often be found walking completley naked. Imagine having nothing to fear and enjoying your body | |
|
| |
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/30/2006 4:23:52 PM | Grrrrrrrr.......
SHADOWDANCING SAID: "If a particular thing we do - contributes to something evil (even passively) – then we could be responsible for it...In simple words – if a naked women walks on the street with an absolute clear conscious and no evil intentions then – she could still be liable for any evil thoughts she may unknowingly instigate within the mind of a lusting guy and vice versa. At the same time – it is important to note that – if the damage she may or may not passively cause is ‘insignificant’ then she will not be punish for her unintentional behavior."
How can one be responsible for the evil someone else does? If a guy walks down the street with a million dollars in cash, he doesn't DESERVE to be mugged. It may not be the best decision he's ever made, but there is no moral turpitude in this act. Let's follow your logic: it implies that not only is the naked woman responsible for the thoughts of others, she DESERVES to get raped. What if she's just dressed in something sexy? Does she still deserve to get raped? What if I wear high heels and walk past a foot fetishist? How is his lust my fault? Are the naked tribal women sometimes shown in National Geographic responsible for the lust of young men using the magazine as a poor man's porn?
How in the world can someone unknowingly cause "damage" passively? And how do you judge what "damage" is "insignificant" and therefore not punishable? Who does the "punishing?"
SHADOWDANCING SAID:
"In short:
Some kind of damage caused = Sin
No damage caused to anyone = No sin.
It is that simple!
...Sins will be measured in direct proportion to the damage it produces.
No, it's NOT that simple. 
You have to downsize your company and let some employees go: damage done.
You buy a diamond ring; diamond mines use slave and child labour: damage done.
You use pesticides on your property; your neighbour's dog dies of cancer: damage done.
You drive your car; air pollution causes millions of deaths every year: damage done.
You walk past the homeless man on the sidewalk asking for change: damage done.
You refuse to talk to someone because you discover s/he is gay: damage done.
You insist on driving an SUV because it's "safer than a car." You hit a small car: damage done.
You do not take the homeless man in and he freezes to death in front of your apartment building: damage done.
According to your logic, these are all sins.
Here's a little lesson in Christian ethics:
INTENT is everything. Harm can often be justified.
There is an objective test for harm justification:
1) Consequences: beneficial or harmful?
2) Whether the objective the act is designed to produce is the benefit or the cost.
3) The "naturalness" of the course of action.
4) The consistency with keeping promises, respecting rights and fulfilling duties. (A shorthand safeguard against rampant emotional decisions.)
5) The message or relationship embodied by the action.
Morally right and wrong need to fall within a range of plausibility. When what is seen as morally right goes beyond a range of plausibility, that then falls into the category of moral insanity.
Read a book on Christian ethics. Read, read, read! Learn, learn, learn!
Or not. | |
|
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/30/2006 5:36:32 PM | By Rareorchid
“Read a book on Christian ethics.”
First of all – I am not a Christian. I do not follow any man known religion. So, I don’t need to read any book on Christian ethics. If you are a Christian then – it is better if you read.
Secondly, I am not God – my post is just my opinion. So lighten up!!
Thirdly, I did say ‘could be responsible’. Check the post again. I didn’t say – anyone walking revealingly will definitely punished for her act in the event if someone lusts after her. So check my earlier post and see that I used the word “COULD”!! Everything is up to God. It is his prerogative to forgive whom he wants.
Fourthly, let me rephrase that equation:
Some kind of damage results out of possible knowledge that it could result (i.e. deliberate and unwarranted) = Sin
However, I must add that – not knowing the law is not a defense. You cannot drive through a red light without stopping and say you didn’t know - it is illegal.
No damage caused to anyone = No sin.
Is that better??
| |
|
chinua
|
Joined: 9/30/2005
Msg: 46 | |
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/30/2006 6:06:22 PM | nope...its not better...............if someone drinks and drives........and doesn't hit anybody............its ok ??? there was no damage to anybody. Your stop sign example is very contradictory.
If you are not a christian,where did you get your idea of 'sin'? You can't blame anybody for thinking you are one. | |
|
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/30/2006 6:17:23 PM | ^^^
By chinua:
“if someone drinks and drives........and doesn't hit anybody............its ok ??? there was no damage to anybody.”
Really? No damage to anyone?
How about damage to thyself and thy body? It doesn’t count?
If you knowingly damage your body then you are committing a sin.
Also you are undermining a city law and might encourage more people to follow your bad example (if you do then that is a sin) and not to mention that you would be risking the lives of others by driving without full control of your senses – if you drive drunk.
“ If you are not a christian,where did you get your idea of 'sin'?”
What are you saying? The idea of sin is only for Christians to figure out? Ha ha ha …very funny!
| |
|
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 10/30/2006 8:36:16 PM | Whoa! Shadowdancing, you really need to think about what you're saying!
SHADOWDANCING SAID: "First of all – I am not a Christian. I do not follow any man known religion. So, I don’t need to read any book on Christian ethics. If you are a Christian then – it is better if you read.
My point is this: ethics are ethics, Christian or otherwise. INTENT is always the condition of what constitutes harm in any equation. If you don't want to read Christian ethics, then read secular ethics, for example, the work of John Rawls. I think it is irresponsible to claim to know what sin is when you have no basis in fact for your claims.
First you said this:
SHADOWDANCING SAID:
"In short:
Some kind of damage caused = Sin
No damage caused to anyone = No sin.
It is that simple!
...Sins will be measured in direct proportion to the damage it produces.
Then you said this:
SHADOWDANCING SAID:
"Fourthly, let me rephrase that equation:
Some kind of damage results out of possible knowledge that it could result (i.e. deliberate and unwarranted) = Sin
While that is a complete revision of what you said earlier, I cannot help but wonder why you are changing that which you claimed was so "simple" in your previous post (admission of error, or effort to clarify). Obviously, it is not that simple, in spite of your claims. Every time one walks out the door, s/he steps on insects, pollutes the air, and does a variety of damage. With knowledge of this damage. Thus, by your definition, it is all sin. There is almost always harm of some kind done everytime we switch on a light, use a pesticide, eat meat...ad infinitum. I am trying to help you understand that harm is done all the time. BUT there is such a thing as harm justified. What you are advocating is that every single thing one does is sin. Don't you see a problem with that?
And then you finish your defense with this little gem:
SHADOWDANCING SAID: "However, I must add that – not knowing the law is not a defense. You cannot drive through a red light without stopping and say you didn’t know - it is illegal. "
I can only ask: Does this mean that anyone who does not know about Jesus is condemned? What about the people born before Christ appeared? Are they all damned? Does this mean that if one doesn't know the Ten Commandments because of illiteracy, or isolation, that s/he is condemned? Traffic law is a far cry from moral law, religious or secular.
I think it is irresponsible to make such comments without any kind of adequate defense. Just because we have a public forum to discuss issues, it does not extricate any of us from speaking intelligently and with some kind of rational support to our arguments.
Read, read, read. Learn, learn, learn.
Or don't. | |
|
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 11/1/2006 5:29:33 AM | At Rareorchid:
Look! My post was about “nudity” and why it may be okay in the heavenly community but may not be okay in this world. I said - in heavenly community God personally won’t let any harm come to anyone through someone’s actions. However, in this world we are pretty much on our own. Our actions can cause harm and damage to others (if we are not careful). If all of mankind starts walking around naked – it may cause havoc in our society. More rape may take place, kids head will be corrupted all the time from a very young age, and so on. We will be like the animals.
The reason I pointed out about sin - was to show that ALL sins cause some sort of damage without any exception. And thus – if an action does not cause any damage (both actively or passively) – then it may not fall into the category of a sinful act. This is why certain things that are wrong in this world – may still be okay in God’s immediate kingdom. For example – one may drive drunk and naked in heaven – if he so choose to do so - BUT it won’t be okay to do so in this world. In heaven, God will make sure no one will be harmed through one’s action and that includes his own self.
Moreover, the ‘equation’ I had shown in my earlier posts – was my opinion regarding “sins”. It is NOT based on any religious teachings. And since when do I have to back it up with world known religious teachings?? I didn’t say I belong to any religion. You foolishly presumed that I must be a Christian. Your fault!
Many theory don’t collaborate 100% with all kinds of examples. Sometimes it may seem that there are some scenarios that a theory doesn’t go along with. That is why they are called a ‘theory’ and not a ‘fact’. In my post I was very clear that – what I wrote was just my opinion.
Take a look at any sin and decide for yourself – if they cause some sort of damage or not. You may see that – all sins cause some sort of damage to someone or something. However, when Adam and Eve were supposedly roaming the heavens in their nakedness– they were not harming anyone – so they were not committing any sin at that time and place. This is why I said – sins are directly related to the damages they generate.
Don’t just read – try to comprehend.
Or don’t.  | |
|
| What is Wrong with Nudity?
Posted: 11/1/2006 7:54:07 AM | Ok. Without religious implication, why is it morally wrong to walk around nude.... Can't do it. Without quoting religious scripture you can't set a moral code of clothing ethics.
Personally - I don't much care about the laws regarding nudity.
I mean... In the winter, it's cold enough at least here that you WANT to wear clothes.
And in the summer - ...well, wearing a bikini top and not wearing a bikini top doesn't make much of a difference when there's a heat wave....SO wear your shorts and whatever and fall into a nice cool swimming pool for a lot of the day and you won't need to worry about the heat anymore.
Personally I don't think it was ever about a moral issue - I think that sexuality while something that should be expressed, also has its time and place.
If you're in the middle of a meeting and you're the only one comfortable with your body and everyone else is either embarrassed because they have moral issues with nudity or because they're sexually aroused...you're never gonna get anything done.
That's why they make clothes manditory. Even if it is just a spedo :P | |
|
Home
login 
