Infertile couples should not be allowed to marry

[Koolblue13]

Aren't all christian religions just the dogmas created by man, how are any of them valid? I'm not very brushed up on my bible talk, but doesn't it say something against churches and such? If Jesus was the son of god and are one in the same, doesn't that meen all people worship the same god? And if so, wouldn't that make the Koran more important than the bible?

I'm not trying to be a smartass, I'm just curious. I'm agnostic I guess, because I don't believe and I can't disprove. I just find the topic interesting. A book, writen by man, can be interpretted in so many different ways and believed in so strongly, it has leed to the deaths of millions and helped to form some of the greatest societies throughout history.

[BlueTiki21]

I'm a survivior of a cancer that has made me infertile. Prostate was removed as well as 13 abdominal lymphnodes to save my life. I'm going to have to go the IVF route to have children, specimen was saved and frozen during surgery. Does this mean I shouldnt be allowed to marry after all I went through to get to this point...? You are an idiot. Does this also mean I shouldnt be able to have sex with the person who sat by my bedside every day through chemo/radiation/surgery? Give me a break. This might be the dumbest rationalization I have ever seen. I'm going to enjoy getting married. I'll send you a post card from this infertiles wedding...:laugh:

Exactly. You beat me to that argument.

[Riggo-toni]

*Sigh*

Read this then. It explains it all.

http://www.trosch.org/the/sex_n-v-un.html

So there it is. Yo-diggity-diggity-diggity.

Nice try, but no. The Old law has prohibitions against sex during a woman's period, and God does punish Onan for pulling out early because he was supposed to produce offspring for his brother's widow, but again you're manipulating specific references to try and interpolate a poor generalization, and then trying to pass it off as some sort of universal Christian dogma. A more concrete argument might be if you were trying to insist that anyone having sex following a woman's period if she hasn't undergone a ritual bathing is sinning. Of course, if you're going to apply all Hebrew laws to Christianity, (thus ignoring Jesus/Pauline claims that Christ fulfilled the old law), then you must surely also condemn those who eat pork, light fires on Saturday, and fail to make animal sacrifices.

[The Sisko]

Honestly Riggo, I think you are wasting your time and keystrokes. The guy is obviously just trying to get a rise out of people.

No, I'd say he's trying to make a point....and doing a darn good job of it I might add.

One of the Doctors I used to work with was a very observant Jew-of which sect I don't remember. She was somewhat conspicuous in that she covered her hair. However, plenty of women of different religions do that. In her case, she stood out because of the way she did so. Instead of wearing a headscarf, she would always wear this ratty, moth eaten wig that was only missing a chinstrap to complete the look.

OK, OK, I'll get to the point. In any event, she told one of the residents (who then relayed it to on of the staff) that according to her faith sex was for procreation ONLY. Furthermore, enjoyment of the act even during the course of procreation was to be minimized. Therefore in order to do the deed, she and her hubby had to use a blanket so they couldn't see each other and once the 'er "exchange" was made all activity had to cease.

...and you guys think Dumbsheet is crazy. Go figure.

[The Sisko]

Or a really bad yeast infection..

I don't think it is immoral if you are a male/female married couple and doing that stuff. Hell, the Song of Solomon in the Bible makes reference to oral sex.

C'mon JP. Surely you must know that Song of Solomon is to Christians what the change in forehead ridges is to Klingons, i.e. it is something NOT to be spoken of.

[DCsportsfan53]

Personally I feel like you're not being very fair here. I am catholic personally. I believe in god, I have my children baptised as my wife and I are. We have palms and pictures in our house even. But you act as though everyone should have faith simply because a book tells them to. You can't sit there and tell me that it should be so easy for everyone to have faith in a god and or religion that they have never seen nor spoken to. Some have that ability to have faith simply because it makes life easier for them if they beleive. Others have a hard time believing in something that has only been "proven" in books of scripture.

I see absolutely no fault on the part of anyone that doesn't believe in faith, because their argument against it is just as potent as the argument of those that are for faith.

The problem I have with "hardcore religious people", is that they are very narrow-minded. Each individual is allowed to make their own decision, but should ultimately be able to atleast accept that others may or may not believe in the same things they do. For you to act as though your religion is the one and only way to go is absolutely ignorant in my mind, as you have no proof of your religion other than a book. This leading back to the faith argument...you have every right to believe in what you do. But you need to realize there is no right/wrong with religion. You should accept others' opinions, whether you like them or not.

Now I do think that saying religion is a crock of bullcrap was wrong. To criticize a religion is simply harsh in my mind. But I think you're both approaching this the wrong way.

Excellent, excellent post. I don't have a religion one way or another, but that's not to say I don't believe in a higher power. I completely respect other people's right to believe what they believe and I have no illusions about wether I'm more or less "right" than they are. What I can't stand is those who think they've got it all figured out, "know" which religion is the right one and can tell you the one and only way to go about it. That's just pretentious and ignorant to me and for the life of me, I can't understand why a person would ever want those beliefs pushed on other people.

[Dumbsheet]

One of the Doctors I used to work with was a very observant Jew-of which sect I don't remember. She was somewhat conspicuous in that she covered her hair. However, plenty of women of different religions do that. In her case, she stood out because of the way she did so. Instead of wearing a headscarf, she would always wear this ratty, moth eaten wig that was only missing a chinstrap to complete the look.

OK, OK, I'll get to the point. In any event, she told one of the residents (who then relayed it to on of the staff) that according to her faith sex was for procreation ONLY. Furthermore, enjoyment of the act even during the course of procreation was to be minimized. Therefore in order to do the deed, she and her hubby had to use a blanket so they couldn't see each other and once the 'er "exchange" was made all activity had to cease.

http://www.danacarvey.net/media/snl_jc_weird_wild_stuff.wav

[ChampSkinsFanatic]

I'm against gay marriage but something like this will never fly, end of story.

[techboy]

Okay, then, serious answers for serious questions (I'm not touching the rest of this ).

Aren't all christian religions just the dogmas created by man, how are any of them valid?

To some extent, yes, and they are valid insofar as they match the Bible. Despite what you might come to think from listening to the occasional interdenominational squabbling, though, the mainline Christian denominations are very close to each other, to the point that an outsider unfamiliar with the points of disagreement probably couldn't tell the difference (except for obvious and irrelevant style issues) without a careful side by side examination of church by-laws.

I'm not very brushed up on my bible talk, but doesn't it say something against churches and such?

No, and in fact, the Bible instructs Christians to seek fellowship with one another, which means Church.

Literally, the Greek for "fellowship" is translated as "brisket". (For those who don't get it, this is a Southern Baptist joke.)

If Jesus was the son of god and are one in the same, doesn't that meen all people worship the same god?

If they worship Jesus as the son of God and God incarnate, yes.

And if so, wouldn't that make the Koran more important than the bible?

The Koran denies Jesus' divinity in direct contradiction of the Bible (and also on a wide variety of other issues), so it's either one or the other. Islam and Christianity are mutually exclusive, and it is not the same God (the Trinity of Christianity is very different from the "One God" of Islam). At least one faith is wrong.

This is, by the way, why I categorically reject the idea that there is no right or wrong in religion. That statement is demonstrably false on its face.

Given that most of the religions contradict each other, logically, most of them have to be at least partially wrong (and possibly all of them are totally wrong). Two mutually exclusive propositions cannot be true at the same time. That's simple logic.

What people usually mean by this is that no one can know which are right and which are wrong, but that's a totally different concept, and one which Christians (and I) reject.

[The Sisko]

Given that most of the religions contradict each other, logically, most of them have to be at least partially wrong (and possibly all of them are totally wrong). Two mutually exclusive propositions cannot be true at the same time. That's simple logic.

...and this statement is why I categorically respect pretty much everything you write. You're the only Christian I've ever met who takes all the possibilities into account and makes logic based arguements.

That there aren't more religious people of ALL faiths that think about things rationally as you do is why we have as many "My God is better than your God" debates, wars and conflagrations now. Too bad the anti-gay marriage crowd can't do the same.

[Zuck]

Therefore, infertiles, like gays, should not marry.

Discuss.

You're insane.

[Koolblue13]

Okay, but couldn't it possible that you're all wrong. Shouldn't it just be worship god or don't. What I'm trying to say is that yes, it seems all religions opperate under the same god, where it differes is when Jesus came on the scene. Jews accept him as the son of god, but don't worship him. Muslems don't think he was special, but still worship the same god, just a different rule book. Saying Jesus is the son of god, is still mans interpritation of history, not the word of god, it's the word of Jesus.

[Predicto]

Exactly. You beat me to that argument.

We are on page 6 and you still haven't figured out what is going on? Sheesh.

[techboy]

Okay, but couldn't it possible that you're all wrong.

I believe I mentioned that as one logical possibility, yes.

Shouldn't it just be worship god or don't.

If God wants it that way, then yes.

If God doesn't want it that way, then no.

Christianity (and Islam, and to a somewhat lesser extent, Judiasm) argues that God doesn't want it that way. God makes the rules.

What I'm trying to say is that yes, it seems all religions opperate under the same god, where it differes is when Jesus came on the scene. Jews accept him as the son of god, but don't worship him.

No, they don't. I am aware of one Jewish scholar, Pinchas Lapide, who accepts that Jesus was Ressurected based on the evidence, but even he denies that Jesus was God (he argues that the God of Israel performed this miracle as a message to the Jews), but in general, Judaism does not acknowledge any special status for Jesus.

Muslems don't think he was special, but still worship the same god, just a different rule book.

Again, innacurate. Islam treats Jesus as a prophet (though not divine), much like Abraham or Moses, but teaches that God switched Him out with a criminal right before the Crucifixion, and so He did not die on the cross.

Saying Jesus is the son of god, is still mans interpritation of history, not the word of god, it's the word of Jesus.

You're right that it is the word of Jesus that He was the Son of God. Christians argue that he then proved it via His Ressurection. If this is established, then it's the word of God too.

[Koolblue13]

Okay, thanks for the lesson techboy.

[TMK9973]

No, I'd say he's trying to make a point....and doing a darn good job of it I might add.

One of the Doctors I used to work with was a very observant Jew-of which sect I don't remember. She was somewhat conspicuous in that she covered her hair. However, plenty of women of different religions do that. In her case, she stood out because of the way she did so. Instead of wearing a headscarf, she would always wear this ratty, moth eaten wig that was only missing a chinstrap to complete the look.

OK, OK, I'll get to the point. In any event, she told one of the residents (who then relayed it to on of the staff) that according to her faith sex was for procreation ONLY. Furthermore, enjoyment of the act even during the course of procreation was to be minimized. Therefore in order to do the deed, she and her hubby had to use a blanket so they couldn't see each other and once the 'er "exchange" was made all activity had to cease.

...and you guys think Dumbsheet is crazy. Go figure.

I LOVE this thread! It is great. (Although it does scare me how many don't get it).

Ok - To my point. This quote is VERY wrong. The women you are discribing is not a real Jew. In fact - While Catholic Dogma does say Sex is suppose to be for getting pregenet (Which is why no Birth Control is allowed - Remember - The Church only approved the Rytham method in the 60's after the Pill came out) Jews actually have, and always have, recognized that sex among a married couple is a important part of a marragie and allows sex for pleasure. Even the most devout Jew is allowed to use Birth Control. Sex is considered a "Mitsvah" (Good think). Sex is also suppose to be pleasurable and in fact, Jewish law basicly says that the man should not be the only one to have a orgasim.

http://www.jewfaq.org/sex.htm

[TMK9973]

Jews accept him as the son of god, but don't worship him.

]

Wow man - That would be a shocker to my Rabbi and family.

In general - We belive Jesus was a teacher, and some belive he was a profit. However Jews do not belive he was the son of god, nor do we belive he was the messiah. (Please don't bring up Jews for Jesus. because they would be the same as me bringing up Jehovah Witnesses to tell you what Christans belive).

Kool - You may needs some Jewish friends.... Would you like me to be your friend?:laugh:

[Thiebear]

People that havent been married should make no comment on who should and shouldnt.

See I can have children(have 2), I'm not gay (yet), and seem perfectly healthy. Yet I've been married and divorced twice.. I am apparently unable to stay married and should have been banned from the beginning..

Now: You people that are so good at coming up with the standards for admission to everything.. Thank YOU for NOT being there for me.. I could have saved a TON of money.

In closing, you suck at not protecting me from me. Your fired.

[Dumbsheet]

People that havent been married should make no comment on who should and shouldnt.

See I can have children(have 2), I'm not gay (yet), and seem perfectly healthy. Yet I've been married and divorced twice.. I am apparently unable to stay married and should have been banned from the beginning..

Now: You people that are so good at coming up with the standards for admission to everything.. Thank YOU for NOT being there for me.. I could have saved a TON of money.

In closing, you suck at not protecting me from me. Your fired.

what?

[Koolblue13]

]

Wow man - That would be a shocker to my Rabbi and family.

In general - We belive Jesus was a teacher, and some belive he was a profit. However Jews do not belive he was the son of god, nor do we belive he was the messiah. (Please don't bring up Jews for Jesus. because they would be the same as me bringing up Jehovah Witnesses to tell you what Christans belive).

Kool - You may needs some Jewish friends.... Would you like me to be your friend?:laugh:

I was mistaken, something my rabbi was explaining. No, I'm not jewish, just have to have it all covered. J/K. A good family friend became a rabbi. She was like a mother to me after my mom died, but i've always been rather anti religion, so I haven't payed to much attention.

[Predicto]

People that havent been married should make no comment on who should and shouldnt.

See I can have children(have 2), I'm not gay (yet), and seem perfectly healthy. Yet I've been married and divorced twice.. I am apparently unable to stay married and should have been banned from the beginning..

Now: You people that are so good at coming up with the standards for admission to everything.. Thank YOU for NOT being there for me.. I could have saved a TON of money.

In closing, you suck at not protecting me from me. Your fired.

Classic Thiebear! I have no idea what you are saying!

[willmb5]

So you mean to tell me you've never wacked it????

You dont know what you're missin

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Well, my friend from the great republic of Ted Kennedy, you are a heathen. What you are practicing is a combination of one or more of the following hedonistic acts: contraceptive sex (sinful whether it be in the bounds of matrimony or not), abstinence during marriage (not having sex with your married partner is against God's purpose and annulls the marriage), masturbation, or beastiality. In other words, you're a bad boy.

Actually, YES my roommates and I are Pagans, so your heathen comment is technically correct; and the "rules" from your book don't apply to us. Personally, I practice ABSTINANCE since I'm not currently in a relationship. My roommates use other means to ensure they do not have children.

Well this isn't sinful because they are at least trying to fullfill the holy purpose intended of their matrimonial union. However, Craig may need to be 'enlightened' as to which orifice to use for successful intercourse. Anus - bad. Mouth - bad. Bellybutton - bad. Vagina - good. Is this really that hard?

I'm quite sure Craig is more than aware of the mechanics and anatomical nature of conception. Though apparently your Divine Being is not "Blessing" him and his wife with a child. Interesting that He would choose to do that with them, when they want a child; yet I know of two different couples (not my roommates) who have chosen to abort children in the last year because He "Blessed" them even though they have no interest in having children. Seems kind of backwards to me.

Now, before you (or anyone else) gets on my back about my condescending attitude about the Bible and Christian "God", realize that I was brought up in a very Faithful Lutheran home. My maternal Grandfather was a Lutheran minister for over 60 years in the Minnesota North and Minnesota South districts of the LCMS. I have more than a handful of other members of my family involved in church work. I know more Christian theology and doctrine than I'd really like to. What you're saying goes against everything I've ever heard, read or been taught about the Christian philosophy of marriage.

[RabidFan]

Your name speaks volumes.

[Siven]

Well, my friend from the great republic of Ted Kennedy, you are a heathen. What you are practicing is a combination of one or more of the following hedonistic acts: contraceptive sex (sinful whether it be in the bounds of matrimony or not), abstinence during marriage (not having sex with your married partner is against God's purpose and annulls the marriage), masturbation, or beastiality. In other words, you're a bad boy.

My girlfriend and I have sex at least three times a day. With condoms and plus she is on the pill. (I'm paranoid). Oral, anal, vagina, whatever. We do it everywhere we can.

Am I a bad person?