Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Melodic Euphoria
Joined: 3/22/2005
Msg: 73
Relationships with moralsPage 2 of 11    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11)
"I have a feeling I'm gonna hear that as the next great pick-up line"

*jog down some notes

**notebook labeled: "top seductive lines of the century"
 Double Cabin
Joined: 11/29/2004
Msg: 76
view profile
History
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/20/2006 2:28:04 PM
"This thread is still going. Wow. I emailed the OP, and we discussed this yesterday. She didn't express herself very well in this thread, and she's aware of it. She's also a little misunderstood because of her poor wording. I won't speak for her, but--after the conversation--I think this thread should just die."

Summer, I was going to honor your wish and E-Mail you but I don't have ovaries. The OP and I went through some E-Mails on an extremely divisive thread of hers last Spring. Whether she misworded herself or not she never took ownership of it and never apologized to any1real or anyone else she chose to insult. The title of the thread and the tone of her posts were impositionist from the outset however she tried to candy coat it. Morality is not a fixed understanding in this universe; Suggesting that it is and that much of your audience's perception of morality is quasi worthless is self serving to say the least.

This is a public forum and we are bound to encounter dissenting opinions and kennings from our own. I do my best to be as respectfull as possible. If I'm ever in error I appreciate it being pointed out to me. If I ever make an absolute assertion and fail to back it up within even one plausible premise please point it out to me and I'll give you more than a cyber six pack. With that said and no apology of substance for at least any1real forthcoming I am guessing this thread will die sooner than later Summer.
 Double Cabin
Joined: 11/29/2004
Msg: 78
view profile
History
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/20/2006 3:00:50 PM
Meg, I am humbled. I misjudged you.

It's just the basic myopic Christian premise that the only means of salvation and virtuous direction is Jesus that bothers most of us more than anything. In fairness to you you didn't say it, but your reference to the Bible put that implication on your part in some of our minds.

I apologize for my own tone. Have a wonderful weekend Meg,

John

Edit: Yes lazy, I'm a bit red, but it's more a smile of gratitude than anything. I stand by my assertions and those that share my kenning. Peace
 bucsgirl
Joined: 3/2/2005
Msg: 79
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/20/2006 3:19:57 PM
I think what happened is communication and understanding. Communication isn't always perfect the first time around, it's possible to say something and not choose your words carefully or for them to be misunderstood. The responses based on the original post were based on what was said and are no less legitimate. Meg came back and clarified what she meant to say, I think that's a sign of character. Communication is a process of back and forth and as long as understanding takes place at some point it is hardly a lost cause. I personally don't see any need for red faces, but that's just my thoughts.
 bucsgirl
Joined: 3/2/2005
Msg: 81
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/20/2006 3:53:36 PM
crunch I think what you're saying is that you're affectionate....maybe? I know I'm an affectionate person and not having ANY contact would just be totally unnatural to me. For me it would almost be like being dishonest to myself or not being myself. I can understand respecting not being sexual right off, that's fine, but not a hug or a kiss? Could do it, but wouldn't want to.
 Double Cabin
Joined: 11/29/2004
Msg: 83
view profile
History
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/20/2006 4:01:30 PM
Crunch, with all due respect, there was no tirade, simply a demand for substantiation that was not forthcoming. With all due respect to Meg she still hasn't adressed any1real's thoughtfull post after she arrogantly dismissed it out of hand. So as to tirades, I humbly suggest you read the body of the thread before you judge the value of what made the thread so confrontational.

Crunch, believe it or not, despite the vitriol that sometimes overflows from this fishbowl many of us do in fact care about the people we choose to become intimate with. Forgive me for finding your suggestion otherwise a bit insulting itself. That said I like many of your posts man. It is the debate that lets us grow. Have a wonderful weekend.
 SexyandBrainy
Joined: 6/26/2005
Msg: 89
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/20/2006 6:19:49 PM
Sexual discipline in a relationship between two human beings was introduced thanks to religious values. It is unnatural for two grown adults to sustain a relationship without consummating it sexually. I can understand the idea of preaching abstinence to teenagers since all sex does in that period of a young adult's life is complicate things and possibly derail them from what they should be focusing on which is: to learn about themselves, get an education, and plan for a future career. But once we humans are established in these aspects there is no reason why we should "abstain" from exploring our sexuality.

As for morals, that is something that people either have or not. Whether it appears that there are less morals today...well maybe. I think it is more the fact that women are more in tune with their sexuality and it is not AS tabu for women to explore it. Clearly it is not 100% accepted yet but it is very different than what it was even 20yrs ago. This combined with the financial independance women have today, there is less need for long term permanent ties so people focus more on transitory ties. We live in a "refund or exchange" society which has now spilled over into our relationships too.
 bucsgirl
Joined: 3/2/2005
Msg: 96
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/20/2006 6:34:40 PM
I don't think the OP was prepared to explain and/or defend her position or opinion. Not taking sides one way or another, but honestly I've been on only 2 other forums both newssites and discussing a case that was national news. Talk about ROUGH and knock down drag out...whew!! It was bloody at times, nearly, but extremely emotional and opinionated. I did just fine, only because I knew what I thought and believed and was well informed and better read than most about the details. It's fine to post what you think and feel but you need to have some backup. Know WHY you think the way you do and if you bring in a hot button aspect as religion wow, you better be prepared for the kitchen to heat up fast! That's just plain fact, people who have posted in forums for awhile know that. Also I've found that using the word "moral" or "morals" is also another trigger word. The OP already clarified that she meant what was moral for her, all the posts BEFORE that are still justified. There is no one "moral" standard for humanity, it is more a standard of behavior that an individual chooses to live their life by.
This was at times a heated thread and nothing necessarily wrong with that. You just can't turn up the heat and walk away and not expect a backlash. Like I had posted earlier, I am always ready to explain WHY I believe and think the way I do, and wiling to listen and accept what others think and believe. We grow as individuals when we're open to that. And that really is the value of interacting and communicating and what makes the forums here so worthwhile. I know I've learned a lot myself and believe I will continue to learn.
 bucsgirl
Joined: 3/2/2005
Msg: 98
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/20/2006 7:08:02 PM
lazy Do not confuse morals with laws. There are moral codes that exist within different societies and cultures. If you want to split hairs, I really don't have the time or patience. I was referring to A moral code for ALL humanity. Your arguments belong in the political forum. Your honor? There is a moral court?? Oh please...well argue your case there, okay?
 bucsgirl
Joined: 3/2/2005
Msg: 99
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/20/2006 7:14:28 PM
lazy What does sexual assault and/or aggravated assault have to do with this topic?

crunch The problem with the OP was that the way it was worded was as the MORAL conscious and saying this is what MORAL IS. At least that's the way I read it and many others did too. She's already clarified that, so we're sort of past that now. Noone that I saw was giving her grief about her own moral or religious convictions.
 Double Cabin
Joined: 11/29/2004
Msg: 109
view profile
History
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/21/2006 7:20:31 AM
DragonN, had to reply before I'm out the door here.

With all due respect the "ire" you speak of has nothing to do with looking in any mirror. It has to do with the fact she was impositionist. She was insulting. Go back and read the posts, she did not engage in the debate she fostered. She arrogantly dismissed valid points out of hand as not being some sort of "real truth." One thing I hope for in discourse is logic, which she obviously lacked yesterday if you actually look at the substance. You don't have any more answers than the rest of us DragonN, unless perhaps you are willing to put a viable syllogism or two in here. Substance is far more persuasive than arrogance IMHO. If anyone is going to try and preach the inventions of men as the word of God to logical people a premise or two, maybe even a quasi-deductively drawn conclusion, sure would help. I know religous folks that do it all the time quite competently.

Meg, thanks again for the humility, it speaks well of you and I ate a tiny portion of crow yesterday as you know. Yet I think you know you should apologize to any1real personaly, your initial response to her remains ludicrous and unforgiveable otherwise IMHO. If you can't see that then there is no use in you getting a book on Forensic technique so you can engage in the debate if in the end that is not what you are really interested in. Honest capitulation is sometimes far more than just the "Christian" thing to do. There are so many good things about faith when you leave the arrogance out of it, it can help you accomplish so much instead of being debilitating which IMHO it is for you now. If I missed an apology to any1real here this morning my apologies. DragonN, there are lovely shades (glasses) this spring that aren't quite so rose colored. If you're still in Taiwan perhaps we could start a bottled water drive here for you? Just kidding. You know I like you however vehemently we disagree with each other. Ticket is a lucky guy, as long as he shares your kenning I guess.

So, in the interest of truth and civility I suggest anyone that sees the arguments put forth to the OP here as something that brought forth unacceptable response I encourage you to actually ascertain the substance of the OPs initial posts. She's coming to understand it apparently, may you all put a little logic in that proverbial cup of coffee this morning. IMHO Insults without substance are for JR High Locker Rooms, not adult discussions.
 bucsgirl
Joined: 3/2/2005
Msg: 111
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/21/2006 7:59:36 AM
crunch Honestly, unless I missed a post, I don't recall anyone wanting to "change" the OP or her beliefs or values. She is free to do or not do whatever she chooses, just as everyone else is. That wasn't the point, at least not the posts that I read.
 SexyandBrainy
Joined: 6/26/2005
Msg: 115
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/21/2006 11:39:59 AM
That the Mirror of Murkiness is the same one that reflects back the light of Life Experience?
In many senses the essence of God referred to is none other than the one within..? Or not? Depends where you choose to look.


@DragonN
When I first read this mirror statement a few pages back I found it a little insulting, almost harsh but now that you've explained what that statement means it makes so much sense and they are probably the wisest words I have heard on this topic. So very well said.
(good old email and it's misinterpretations lol)

I always thought that the need for religion was to guide those that have found a hard time in guiding themselves. It is no coincidence that addicts and people who want to turn their lives around often turn to religion to be saved. And it's not like these people are weaker or less insightful or anything derogatorry, it is simply that they needed the external help to open new paths in their journey and religion does provide a solid foundation to refocus again.

Fundamentally to me though, religion is comparable to fanaticism and it may start off as a good path but inevitably ends in an extreme one. And letting our sexual nature be conrolled by religious doctrine seems extreme to me, mind you I was born under catholicism and as you know it's pretty extreme when it comes to sexuality and it's moral conduct. Gees if I would have stayed on track with what it expects I'd be the 36 yr old virgin LOL OR I would have married someone who was just not right for me simply to consumate the relationship.
Either way at some point we need to make our own choices and as DragonN said respond to the God within.

 SexyandBrainy
Joined: 6/26/2005
Msg: 118
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/22/2006 11:12:54 AM
God bless freedom of speech in the United States of America. God bless my president George W. Bush and all he has appointed. We citizens of the United States of American may not see eye to eye on several or many issues, but if you don't like the life you are living in the good old U.S. of A. then get the heck out of here fast. All others opinion on me and my government.....



what the HECK does all this bible thumping rant and G Bush stuff have to do with the thread topic!?!? talk about not following forum rules....

It was off-topic = deleted

As is any Off-Topic/Chat/Flames/Insults/Etc.

The posting rules are in place for a reason
 SexyandBrainy
Joined: 6/26/2005
Msg: 119
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/22/2006 12:01:41 PM
@ tigerwoods I read your post and it was related to the OP but what the hell does Bush and the fact that "GOD wanted him in power"?have to do with any of this is beyond me. ????? LOL " gotta love bible thumpers

I too made lots of references to religion and morality I would say it is very much on topic of what is being asked in the OP. A lot of us made references to religion.

FYI just because the person who started this thread decides not to post in here any more does not mean the thread gets killed.

@DC you know I respect your way of thinking and posting but what are you going on about??? I have been trying to decode your posts for days now!?!?
Can someone please tell me what he is talking about?
 Melodic Euphoria
Joined: 3/22/2005
Msg: 120
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/23/2006 7:37:21 AM

@angielah

Well, you may be technically right in that it IS the repression of physical urges, but ...

Many people take great satisfaction from the ascetic lifestyle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascetic

To them, discipline and control are their own rewards, and bring one closer to enlightenment and spirituality. Just like a marathon runner resists the physical signals of his body to stop, or a masochist endures the immediate pain, the idea is that the exercise of such control leads one to a much richer and rewarding sense of satisfaction in the end.

To discount chastity as mere "repression" is to deny these other perspectives and question their validity.

I would argue that, just perhaps, the eventual rewards of the ascete (or the chaste) are far greater than the immediate rewards of the hedonist ... but then again, maybe not.
:)



I was actually mostly referring to two people in love, and that it is not ultimately fulfilling in a relationship if one refrain oneself from showing affection to the other person. Yes, physical contact is far from the most important element in a healthy relationship, but it's necessary as a part of communication, a way of showing your partner the extent of your attraction, your vunerability, caring and connection of your soulmate.

I've nothing but respect for people who have the discipline to restrain themselves from engaging in sexual activities until marriage. In fact, I've made the vow of chastity myself and have never even allowed any guy to kiss me yet! But I'd still argue that with the person you love, especially after marriage, be totally honest with your feelings and your body language towards your lover and don't hold back. That's the best way to love - the un-repressed love!

~peace.
 bucsgirl
Joined: 3/2/2005
Msg: 128
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/24/2006 4:40:08 PM
dot I think you summed it up nicely with this. "Morals and religion are not one in the same. Non religious people have been known to have strong morals." That was what I was TRYING to say...you said it MUCH more concisely. Thanks.
 bucsgirl
Joined: 3/2/2005
Msg: 129
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/24/2006 4:53:57 PM
Thanks, sweetie, and I've love to answer that, but I think that'd be WAY off topic!! Religion isn't my favorite forum topic anyway, I like discussing that one on one. Hope you understand.
 marathonman11x7
Joined: 4/29/2005
Msg: 133
Relationships with morals
Posted: 1/25/2006 10:16:00 AM

there is a big difference between a girl that sleeps around just because daddy didnt give her enough attention, and teenagers and young adults that get into relationships and have sex.

Please explain the "big"difference. The statement seems to make an assumption and seems extremely judgemental.


but his virginity also lead to other problems. for a while, he was a porn addict because he was suppressing his physical urges.
let me tell ya girl, i wouldve rather him slept with someone and experienced real sex than all that fake crap. trying to be "unnatural" only leads to worse

Are you sure he wouldn't have been a "porn addict" had he not been a virgin? You do understand that there are millions of non-virgins who also may appear to be addicted to porn right? Also,if he had slept with someone before you does it mean that he would have been any better than he is now?
"REALITY" is relative and perceptual.
 wildfire1950
Joined: 1/10/2006
Msg: 136
Relationships with morals
Posted: 4/6/2006 8:59:22 AM
Hi Jimi !! Hi Meg !!

Thanks for speaking up, Jimi. Hang in there, Meg.

I really think that some of these older folk around here have been trying to palm themselves off as sages and they are not. Well, I am an old guy and really hope that what I say does not sound condescending. And I don't feel the need to beat my drums about education, age wisdom or any of that bull hockey.

Meg, I hope that you will not be jarred by some of the crock seen here on this thread. There are some very, very twisted and wrong headed opinions expressed here and with the subtle arrogance of the Playboy philosophy. Don't we recall that Playboy insinuated that we were little fools if we could not appreciate that a naked woman was art?

Yeah! I fell for it for a little while. The truth about women is that they are human like the rest of us, but they are emotionally wired differently. No equality there.

I think that some of these self-anointed sages around here tried to slip around me wioth this discussion and avoided comment simply because they sensed that what I suggested to Meg was very appropriate and was not about judgment. Isn't it funny to hear the PC crowd whining when we step all over their lame ideas that have never worked and never will work because they are based on sheer lies. And lies don't work!

Meg, sorry that you did not meet with very much good sense here. In an environment like the internet, the role of a publisher does not exist. So, a lot a crap gets published that would otherwise bite the dust. I don't even think Playboy would print some of this junk.

If you are tired of this thread, you don't have to stay. If you feel like I do, you are already seeing that local opinions are like butts. Everybody's got one and they are a dime a dozen.

Here's what I've seen in life. Young girls get sucked into promiscuity and this causes them to have a very hard time handling a marriage. Regardless of their level of religion or spirituality, they cannot handle the load of guilt or uncertainty or whatever it is that nags them so badly that they cannot function in a marriage.

Personally, marriage has a lot of wonderful things to offer us. Not to mention that you seldom ever have to wonder when you get to have those really fun times together. As a married man, I usually enjoyed good sex from two to four times a week. I never had it so good when I was single and on the prowl.

Now, marriage is like any other relationship in one respect. What do you bring to the table? What do they bring to the table? Heck! If I know that somebody is dishonest, it would be crazy to get yoked with them.

I was married for 25 years when my soon to be former wife lost her mind. She decided to leave the nest. Yes, we stopped living together because it was unbearable, but we kept the friendship. I am still committed to her wellbeing and bug her family to get her to her doctors. We even eat out sometimes. Yet, I am moving on and may eventually partner with a good person. There are those who judge me for moving on and opening up to friendships with other women, but remember, it was my wife's choice to break off. Do you get it?

CK
 verygreeneyez
Joined: 3/15/2006
Msg: 138
Relationships with morals
Posted: 4/17/2006 12:37:20 PM

I think that my basic point is that physical touch should have nothing to do with love...you dont have to be physical to develop love...and I have many friends as well that i share love, trust, and communication with. But, what I am talking about is a realtionhsip that you display the very most of self-control and say no to the desires you have physically.


Wow, I couldn't get passed this to read any other posts.

Someone has completely baffled your senses with this "stuff." First, let's get this straight...I'm celibate and have relationships. Sex doesn't have to exist to have "intimate" relationships. Now, that being said...you are missing such a big portion of the picture.

To think for one second that physical touch is not necessary is not only ridiculous, but a very very drastically wrong statement. Mothers/fathers and their children are a very good example. Mothers/fathers cuddle, kiss, hold, etc., their young. Human touch is a necessary part of health on all levels. Babies that are not held have serious issues throughout life. Human touch does not equate to sex. I fear someone has brainwashed you, Dear. Hopefully you and your "morals" can find a middle ground which will allow you a healthier outlook on life. Leave sex out of the equation, that is easy. Take away love via human touch, you're going to miss out on the purest form of love there is. I actually feel sorry for you ~ now that is sad!!!
 verygreeneyez
Joined: 3/15/2006
Msg: 139
Relationships with morals
Posted: 4/17/2006 12:51:03 PM
Oh, and as for the "religious" aspect you are speaking ~ obviously "perception" has been dictated to you. Find an independent party, a clergyman/pastor/priest/etc. (someone you don't already know) and have a heart to heart discussion with them about physical contact and the Bible/Christianity. I have a very strong feeling you will be awakened to the travesties that you have unfortunately been fed. If you attended Easter services yesterday, I must ask ~ how many people hugged one another at that service? How many young unmarried couples held hands while welcoming the sermon into their hearts/lives? How many mothers/fathers held their children and thought how blessed they are for the time together and the opportunity to be with like-minded people on a day they concider "holy?" Wow, I'm in shock. One must ask, what form of Christianity are you practicing??? (***I was raised Christian but am not now, yet I do believe that true Christians, on the whole, would never relate to this thread topic.***) Such a sad commentary.
 verygreeneyez
Joined: 3/15/2006
Msg: 141
Relationships with morals
Posted: 4/17/2006 1:18:30 PM

kaytiejessiesum- Do you feel that maybe you are misrepresenting your religion in this thread? From what I understand of the Christian religion, God is the only one who is worthy of judging people because he is the one who created them. You, however, have not only been judging people, but attempting to belittle them for the lifestyles they lead, simply because they are different than yours. I have to agree that you should open your eyes/mind and realize that "your way" is not the only way.


I never stop being amazed when I see professed Christians judging others. Organized religion at it's finest!!!
Show ALL Forums  > Relationships  >