100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Whats everyones take on one night stands? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I like how some people seem to think that they can get around an injunction about not casting the first stone by adding an "each to his own" disclaimer. It must be difficult to hold to a religious faith when it's doublethink and about holding contradictory ideas in your head at the same time. Personlly, I prefer logic but nothing wrong with a bit of absurdity from time to time if it's humorous and not really meant to be taken seriously. Who's talking religious? Some people confuse having a "moral code of ethics" as "religion or being religious" instead of realizing it's about the character of the person being spoken of, not necessarily about their religious or lack of religious beliefs. There do happen to be people who are not of any religious faith who choose to live their lives by their own very moral code dictated by their own conscience, so it is sad that he thinks it's all "religion-based". Nevertheless, he seems to think that this so-called "religious faith" is too difficult for anyone to keep and that we are bound to have contradictory ideas somehow, which could not be further from the truth. It's easy to follow a path if it's the one you've chosen...it speaks of who you are within yourself...who you've chosen to be for yourself, not for others. It's just something that I'm interested in from a philisophical point of view. I see faith as something that a person has to struggle with and not be complacent about, like logic or matter of fact. Faith is about personal conviction and you are indeed correct about that. I require no faith to believe in mathematical propositions or common sense beliefs but as the philosopher Kierkegaard says, if God's existence could be proven there would be no need for faith. Anyway, do I think that you are a hypocrite for judging others when you follow a religion that says not to do that? Perhaps and it matters not if you didn't bring religion into it because you do claim to be a Christian and I can therefore call you out for casting stones and also preaching about sin. If it's about just believing in things that you merely happen to believe in as a person and they also fit in with religious dogmas, that's just a matter of convenience. That requires no faith either and then I suppose that you may as well just do away with the religion because it's superfluous. You were moralising and going further than just talking about your own personal moral code. You even got somebody to apologise for saying something that went against your morality. Whether or not I agree with you about the topic under discussion here or feel the same way about sex is by the by. I can still put it to you that your beliefs are inconsistent if you claim to be a Christian, just as people like Dodo like to do when they look at profiles and say that people are not really Christians when they say things that seem to go against that religion. Whether or not I agree with you about the topic under discussion here or feel the same way about sex is by the by. I can still put it to you that your beliefs are inconsistent if you claim to be a Christian, just as people like Dodo like to do when they look at profiles and say that people are not really Christians when they say things that seem to go against that religion. Not quite so in this form of discussion. There was no original "religious" beliefs shared here. Weather or not we are talking about morals and the person in question happens to be Christian, the talking about morals as a whole does not include them being Christian or have anything to do with the belief therein. We have our morals and ethics because we chose them and feel right using them. Not just because some religious belief says such and such. My point is all our morals and things of such come from somewhere. Regardless if one wishes to admit it or really has thought about it. Our morals come from somewhere else, and this can be simply seen by knowing that the person in question did not come up with that moral, so therefore it had to have existed before them or their thought to have that moral. People don't just think of good morals/bad morals. They are already in existence and taught to us by this or that. So my point is, it is quite irrelevant to bring up that the person is Christian or other while discussing morals. Does not mean they received their morals from that belief therein. Heck, they could have had those morals before they became a "Christian" or anything other belief you wish to replace Christian with here. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I get all of my religious understandings from Family Guy. Try The Simpsons instead. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like how some people seem to think that they can get around an injunction about not casting the first stone by adding an "each to his own" disclaimer. It must be difficult to hold to a religious faith when it's doublethink and about holding contradictory ideas in your head at the same time. Personlly, I prefer logic but nothing wrong with a bit of absurdity from time to time if it's humorous and not really meant to be taken seriously. Who's talking religious? Some people confuse having a "moral code of ethics" as "religion or being religious" instead of realizing it's about the character of the person being spoken of, not necessarily about their religious or lack of religious beliefs. There do happen to be people who are not of any religious faith who choose to live their lives by their own very moral code dictated by their own conscience, so it is sad that he thinks it's all "religion-based". Nevertheless, he seems to think that this so-called "religious faith" is too difficult for anyone to keep and that we are bound to have contradictory ideas somehow, which could not be further from the truth. It's easy to follow a path if it's the one you've chosen...it speaks of who you are within yourself...who you've chosen to be for yourself, not for others. It's just something that I'm interested in from a philisophical point of view. I see faith as something that a person has to struggle with and not be complacent about, like logic or matter of fact. Faith is about personal conviction and you are indeed correct about that. I require no faith to believe in mathematical propositions or common sense beliefs but as the philosopher Kierkegaard says, if God's existence could be proven there would be no need for faith. Anyway, do I think that you are a hypocrite for judging others when you follow a religion that says not to do that? Perhaps and it matters not if you didn't bring religion into it because you do claim to be a Christian and I can therefore call you out for casting stones and also preaching about sin. If it's about just believing in things that you merely happen to believe in as a person and they also fit in with religious dogmas, that's just a matter of convenience. That requires no faith either and then I suppose that you may as well just do away with the religion because it's superfluous. You were moralising and going further than just talking about your own personal moral code. You even got somebody to apologise for saying something that went against your morality. Whether or not I agree with you about the topic under discussion here or feel the same way about sex is by the by. I can still put it to you that your beliefs are inconsistent if you claim to be a Christian, just as people like Dodo like to do when they look at profiles and say that people are not really Christians when they say things that seem to go against that religion. Whether or not I agree with you about the topic under discussion here or feel the same way about sex is by the by. I can still put it to you that your beliefs are inconsistent if you claim to be a Christian, just as people like Dodo like to do when they look at profiles and say that people are not really Christians when they say things that seem to go against that religion. Not quite so in this form of discussion. There was no original "religious" beliefs shared here. Weather or not we are talking about morals and the person in question happens to be Christian, the talking about morals as a whole does not include them being Christian or have anything to do with the belief therein. We have our morals and ethics because we chose them and feel right using them. Not just because some religious belief says such and such. My point is all our morals and things of such come from somewhere. Regardless if one wishes to admit it or really has thought about it. Our morals come from somewhere else, and this can be simply seen by knowing that the person in question did not come up with that moral, so therefore it had to have existed before them or their thought to have that moral. People don't just think of good morals/bad morals. They are already in existence and taught to us by this or that. So my point is, it is quite irrelevant to bring up that the person is Christian or other while discussing morals. Does not mean they received their morals from that belief therein. Heck, they could have had those morals before they became a "Christian" or anything other belief you wish to replace Christian with here. For further understanding of what I'm saying here and more closely connected with the OP. One night stands or dangerous and pointless in the long run. Dangerous because depending on how far this date goes, many diseases and things of that nature can happen or be spread. And plus they end up feeling just as lonely if not worse afterwards. Sometimes the one night stand can cause things/emotions to be worse because now are they not only alone again afterwards, but feel used, and possibly feel bad about the actions shared for that night. And they are pointless for about the same reasons. Yes the one night stand may allow you to feel like you have someone for that night and or be able to release this cardinal feelings you have inside of you for that night. But there's most usually always a tomorrow one has to face the regrets of that night. They may not happen immediately, but later on they may look back and say to themselves, what was I thinking. And so on and so on. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now, if I had seven wives or seven girlfriends, I could have one night with this one and one night with that one and so on totaling a bunch of one nighters!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now, if I had seven wives or seven girlfriends, I could have one night with this one and one night with that one and so on totaling a bunch of one nighters! Who would ever want that lol. That's to much to keep up with and way to much love to try to spread out. Think it would work much better to bundle all that care up and give it to one person, meaning from your example that one woman would be 7x as much care and love then any one of those other 6 lol. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Conrad_73
on
Mon 06/09/14 10:27 AM
|
|
Duh!!! wud certainly have to take precautions... No one wud wana suffer from STD... Famous last thoughts,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,b-b-b-but I thought that Gun wasn't loaded! Must be interesting doing Russian Roulette with a fully loaded Cylinder!  Sex is one of the most important aspects of man's life and, therefore, must never be approached lightly or casually. A sexual relationship is proper only on the ground of the highest values one can find in a human being. Sex must not be anything other than a response to values. And that is why I consider promiscuity immoral. Not because sex is evil, but because sex is too good and too important . . . . [Sex should] involve . . . a very serious relationship. Whether that relationship should or should not become a marriage is a question which depends on the circumstances and the context of the two persons lives. I consider marriage a very important institution, but it is important when and if two people have found the person with whom they wish to spend the rest of their lives,a question of which no man or woman can be automatically certain. When one is certain that one's choice is final, then marriage is, of course, a desirable state. But this does not mean that any relationship based on less than total certainty is improper. I think the question of an affair or a marriage depends on the knowledge and the position of the two persons involved and should be left up to them. Either is moral, provided only that both parties take the relationship seriously and that it is based on values. Playboy Interview: Ayn Rand Playboy, March 1964 http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/sex.html |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Duh!!! wud certainly have to take precautions... No one wud wana suffer from STD... Famous last thoughts,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,b-b-b-but I thought that Gun wasn't loaded! Must be interesting doing Russian Roulette with a fully loaded Cylinder! Sex is one of the most important aspects of man’s life and, therefore, must never be approached lightly or casually. A sexual relationship is proper only on the ground of the highest values one can find in a human being. Sex must not be anything other than a response to values. And that is why I consider promiscuity immoral. Not because sex is evil, but because sex is too good and too important . . . . [Sex should] involve . . . a very serious relationship. Whether that relationship should or should not become a marriage is a question which depends on the circumstances and the context of the two persons’ lives. I consider marriage a very important institution, but it is important when and if two people have found the person with whom they wish to spend the rest of their lives—a question of which no man or woman can be automatically certain. When one is certain that one’s choice is final, then marriage is, of course, a desirable state. But this does not mean that any relationship based on less than total certainty is improper. I think the question of an affair or a marriage depends on the knowledge and the position of the two persons involved and should be left up to them. Either is moral, provided only that both parties take the relationship seriously and that it is based on values. Playboy Interview: Ayn Rand Playboy, March 1964 http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/sex.html lol points for the play on words >.< |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It happens... The memories from my early 20s and closing time.. I'm amazed its still hanging down there to be honest... Remember, if its that easy for you, probably that easy for everyone... Exactly, that's the main reason I don't participate in this form of "activity" to say the least lol. Who know's how many men are there before you. If it's that easy to get her for the night, imagine how frequently she does that and remember that semen will remain alive in a woman's vagina for 7 days. Little food for thought before you go sticking "it" somewhere someone else has been, possibly recently if she's that easy. Cowboy... With all due respect, this is pucked up and I think you might be confusing promiscuity with fornicating bareback? I'm pretty sure no one here is suggesting such a dangerous gamble |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It happens... The memories from my early 20s and closing time.. I'm amazed its still hanging down there to be honest... Remember, if its that easy for you, probably that easy for everyone... Exactly, that's the main reason I don't participate in this form of "activity" to say the least lol. Who know's how many men are there before you. If it's that easy to get her for the night, imagine how frequently she does that and remember that semen will remain alive in a woman's vagina for 7 days. Little food for thought before you go sticking "it" somewhere someone else has been, possibly recently if she's that easy. Cowboy... With all due respect, this is pucked up and I think you might be confusing promiscuity with fornicating bareback? I'm pretty sure no one here is suggesting such a dangerous gamble ??? lost me there. Everything I mentioned is everything that has to do with "casual" sex or "one night stands". One night stands or casual sex is all entirely that "dangerous gamble" as you put it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Everything I mentioned is everything that has to do with "casual" sex or "one night stands" Wrong! Have a nice day |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Everything I mentioned is everything that has to do with "casual" sex or "one night stands" Wrong! Have a nice day According to the Thesaurus the following describes promiscuity as being: Noun 1. promiscuity - indulging in promiscuous (casual and indiscriminate) sexual relations promiscuousness, sleeping around sex, sex activity, sexual activity, sexual practice - activities associated with sexual intercourse; "they had sex in the back seat" one-night stand - a brief sexual encounter lasting only for a single night; "he ran through a series of LOVELESS ONE-NIGHT STANDS". I personally believe Cowboy's comments have been thoroughly directed at the subject of one-night stands (otherwise described as promiscuity by the Thesaurus), or casual sex which are without love involvement and engaged in for solely sexual gratification. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Everything I mentioned is everything that has to do with "casual" sex or "one night stands" Wrong! Have a nice day According to the Thesaurus the following describes promiscuity as being: Noun 1. promiscuity - indulging in promiscuous (casual and indiscriminate) sexual relations promiscuousness, sleeping around sex, sex activity, sexual activity, sexual practice - activities associated with sexual intercourse; "they had sex in the back seat" one-night stand - a brief sexual encounter lasting only for a single night; "he ran through a series of LOVELESS ONE-NIGHT STANDS". I personally believe Cowboy's comments have been thoroughly directed at the subject of one-night stands (otherwise described as promiscuity by the Thesaurus), or casual sex which are without love involvement and engaged in for solely sexual gratification. Thank you, thought that was what this thread was about >.< |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@ cowboy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John is talking about wearing a condom.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Had one once, regretted it immediately, and not because there was anything physically 'bad' about it at all,,,
my standards are just for that part of myself to be kept special and shared in a special relationship,,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@ cowboy *blushes* ... lol sorry don't know the keys for all the nifty emoticons and what not lol >.< |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No one night stands for me thank you... I need that connection that comes with caring about my mate aka love...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ermmm Cowboys point of semen staying active in a womans body for 7 days has absolutely nothing to do with "promiscuity, casual sex or one night stands" and everything to do with VERY poor health choices.
In fact, my experiences tell me the most promiscuous are the ones taking the most safety precautions for themselves and others. There's always the exception of course but no... being promiscuous does not mean practicing UNsafe sex. Am I being clear enough? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With all of this talk about sex, I think I may have some casual sex tonight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now, if I had seven wives or seven girlfriends, I could have one night with this one and one night with that one and so on totaling a bunch of one nighters! Who would ever want that lol. That's to much to keep up with and way to much love to try to spread out. Think it would work much better to bundle all that care up and give it to one person, meaning from your example that one woman would be 7x as much care and love then any one of those other 6 lol. True... I can barely keep up with one to be honest.. |
|
|
|
|
