RE: Religion and D/s (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion



Message


SixFootMaster -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 4:08:47 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

Mencken was a sarcastic, cynical fellow with little more than distaste for the masses.  His voice suits me when the subject's religion and other superstitions.

You can say I'm no different than the street-corner evangelists who tell everyone they are going to hell, but to say such is to imply that you care little for the difference between proganda and truth. Still, in saying this, you're among the more honest individuals.

While I would disagree with your point concerning your children, I do feel it would be distasteful to debate something involving those in your personal life.


Truth is a dangerous word, particularly in the mouths of the prejudiced.

Tell me, oh enlightened CuriousLord. What is THE truth?

Six.




Aneirin -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 6:03:43 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: xoxi

My Master is a Christian, and even though I was raised by two agnostics, I do believe in God and believe that Christ was a holy man, son of God, prophet, etc. But lately I've been curious about the Bible, particularly the parts that discuss how to live in a Biblical marriage.

I know that there are neo-pagan groups who worship forms of a Mother Goddess - I don't know much about them, but I wonder if those religions are more likely to proscribe a female role as the dominant head of the family in the same way that Judeo-Christian religion (and Islam too I believe) consider the male to be the leader.

The Bible states clearly that the natural order is for a wife to submit to her husband.  That is something that I personally believe...I know there are people who will disagree with me and all I can say is that I respect your right to disagree, but that's not the focus of this thread.  What I'm curious about is for the religious people out there, how does your religion view the idea of power exchange in relationships, and how does that affect your own view on it if at all?



I am pagan in belief, but not of a group.Not of a group because I saw the groups that were getting bogged down on what is the true word, nor will I have someone tell me who are what to believe in, I have my own mind,and what calls to me I follow as my path, my personal path which is right for me, and perhaps right for me only.

I see the Goddess as where we come from, the mother, i.e. female,, as is everything in nature, from the female of the species. Not saying that the female is of paramount importance, as without the male, creation cannot exist, so either sex to me is of equal value, though at times the female is the most important and other times the male, both sexes have their role in creation and therefore equality. Males seek out females and females want males from time to time, this being the nature within them, the primal drive.

As to the OP's question, how does religion and D/s exist? I am single, and male, I seek my equal and opposite, the female, but the right kind of female, not just any. I am largely dominant on my exterior, as I am day to day, but my core is submissive, submissive to the goddess that is in the female. I wish to serve the female, but in a spiritual capacity, is why I say I seek the right kind of female. The right kind of female is one who understands my desire to submit to woman is about my spirituality and what I seek in her, not her herself, she is not superior, she is of equal footing, but the Goddess that is in her is superior at the time.

All the things of BDSM, the depravities, I see them as natural, they came to man's mind for a reason, they are a product of man's mind,(man meaning both male and female). I see these things as vehicles for us to journey into ourselves, perhaps reach our core, the spiritual self, a place where we can commune with our maker and learn what we are.

Perversions, if they come naturaly to a person should be followed, they come as perhaps a way sign to lead to other places, places in the spirit and there our wholeness.

Aneirin




SirDragon1961 -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 6:55:10 AM)

I love the thrill of a Moderator checking my profile.   Aw come on- do it again!




RCdc -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 7:26:28 AM)

Hello xoxi
Trying to stay on topic here for you.[;)]
I know that people - both christian and non believers often refere back to Leviticus to bring out the whole 'homosexual acts are evil' to both ridicule christians and to place or force a persons own moral codes on others.
 
However, it is vital to be aware of history at the time that particular scripture is refering to so as not misuse the text.(whether you are a christian or a non christian or an atheist)
The OT is Jewish text, not christian (although it must not be forgotten.obviously.)and refers to customs and 'edicts' that the jews needed so as to sepetate themselves from the Canaanites, as their identiy was important to them(still is) and there was fear of it being lost.
 
However, as christians, one follows Christ.  In Mark, Jesus rejects the 'purity codes' which Leviticus is basically about and absolutely nowhere in the NT is homosexuality mentioned as immorality.  In fact, Jesus heals a young man who - if history has anything to go by - has a high probability he was gay.  That is conjecture of course, but a possibility and Jesus heals his fits and saves his life.
 
So, that said within a Ds environment - or basically any environment - homosexuality is not breaking any laws of God as a christian - and even the word wife could be interpreted many ways from original texts.
 
If a woman is the dominant within a Ds relationship, it could absolutely be interpreted that the man is the wife.
I often find it quite astounding particularly when confronted by BDSM people that they revert back to very specific labels of husband and wife roles (christian and non christians) - when labeling is so open to subjective interpretation within BDSM dynamics - as if BDSMers have the ultimate authority in altering wording - but it has occured through subsections of communities for many years.
 
I do not therefore subscribe to the notion that wife must = woman and therefore all women should submit.  But I do defend a persons right to submit to who they wish, call themselves what they wish within their own Ds dynamics, be they straight, gay, bi, poly or monogamous.
 
I'm not sure if that is any use - and I do again apologise for my earlier hijack of your thread.
 
the.dark.




RCdc -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 7:31:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aneirin
Perversions, if they come naturaly to a person should be followed, they come as perhaps a way sign to lead to other places, places in the spirit and there our wholeness.

Aneirin


Hello A.
Whilst I do absolutely believe that most perversions should be nurtured, I do dislike a blanket statement that all perversions should be.  There are perversions which should remain controlled if they harm other people without their knowledge or if the perversion is hurtful in a negative way - like gossip or ridicule for example - wife/husband beatings - or child abuse.
I do understand you probably did not mean to include these as 'perversions' - but the facts remain that they are defined as perversions and are therefore included in such a blanket statement.
 
the.dark.




RCdc -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 7:37:21 AM)

Ah Aswad -
You are my breath of fresh air, as always!  I always get the fuzzies when I see you post on a political or religious thread.[;)]

Thank you for responding to my post, and sorry I messed up your font!
 
the.dark.




Aneirin -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 7:44:50 AM)

Well done dark, as far thinking as usual, you are of course very correct, you know me and what I would call perversion, my perversions, some,being small potatoes to others or not even what a perversion as others see it.

The things you mention and a whole lot besides, things that create negativity, though maybe perversions, are just plain wrong and if evil is a viable concept, are just that, evil. Things I believe not only affect the victims, but actually destroy the soul of the attacker. A souless person is but a shell, even a non person, not the kind of person I wish to be or know.

I am very mindful of what is right and wrong as it applies to others, they first, me next.




cjan -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 7:48:42 AM)

Thanks for the virtual spanking, 11. I meant no disrespect to you, of course.




CuriousLord -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 11:01:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

Truth is a dangerous word, particularly in the mouths of the prejudiced.

Tell me, oh enlightened CuriousLord. What is THE truth?


That there's no evidence for a God.  Duuuuhhhhh! :P

Heh.  One of the guys in my PChem class started that for group projects.  We got a lot of "critical thinking" questions to answer each class, most of which were actually very easy.  So, after we answered each, he'd roar, "Duhhhh!"  One good way to keep amused during a long day!




Justme696 -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 12:38:04 PM)

lol  well but you have to chew chewing gum when you say it.....duhhhhhhhh
works for a laugh




mzbehavin -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 1:07:47 PM)

Ok, gives up... wanders out~




SixFootMaster -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 1:18:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CuriousLord

quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

Truth is a dangerous word, particularly in the mouths of the prejudiced.

Tell me, oh enlightened CuriousLord. What is THE truth?


That there's no evidence for a God.  Duuuuhhhhh! :P

Heh.  One of the guys in my PChem class started that for group projects.  We got a lot of "critical thinking" questions to answer each class, most of which were actually very easy.  So, after we answered each, he'd roar, "Duhhhh!"  One good way to keep amused during a long day!


Sure there is, but not scientific evidence, and most of the evidence that supports my convictions I can't show to you. Duuuhhhhh!

Six.




Justme696 -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 1:19:45 PM)

quote:

and most of the evidence that supports my convictions I can't show to you


evidence that can't be shown   lol

come on guys.....stop hitting eachother now.

Master yourself....... *grin*




SixFootMaster -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 1:20:04 PM)

Excellent post, Aneirin.

Thanks for contributing.

Six.




SixFootMaster -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 1:23:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Justme696

quote:

and most of the evidence that supports my convictions I can't show to you


evidence that can't be shown   lol

come on guys.....stop hitting eachother now.

Master yourself....... *grin*



Shush ;) All in good fun. What do they say? Never criticise a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes? Truthfully I have had some experiences which have underscored and reaffirmed my faith in the divine sentient, but those aren't something I can demonstrate or prove to anyone. So for me, yes, there is ample evidence in my life that God exists. One of the key tenets of scientific endeavor is repeatability - and this kind of evidence just can't be used that way. Call it anecdotal if you must.

Six.




Justme696 -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 1:24:53 PM)

I know..somethings can't be shown...
just had to say something about this small war ;)





CuriousLord -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 2:11:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

Sure there is, but not scientific evidence, and most of the evidence that supports my convictions I can't show to you. Duuuhhhhh!


To say "evidence" is evidence, but not "scienfitic evidience" to say that, scientifically, it's not evidence at all!

What other type of "evidence" do you accept?

Duuhhhh!




SixFootMaster -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 2:57:50 PM)

Anecdotal evidence, secondary evidence and tertiary evidence.

Not every piece of evidence is "scientific" primary evidence you know. Beyond the physical sciences, other disciplines accept broader ranges of evidence, particularly those dealing with sociology and history. Duuuuhhhhh!




xoxi -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 4:15:07 PM)

A few short posts in one. Starting from the bottom working back.

CL,
I think that's the point that was made earlier by (forgotthescreenname) that scientific discipline is inherently biased.  There is a definite bias toward one form of evidence, dismissing all others as "if you can not show me this, it may as well not even exist."  Personally I believe there are truths that are neither tangible nor demonstratable, such as the existence of love.  Any demonstration that 'shows' you love someone can also be used to try to weasel a favor out of them.  Scientifically, love does not exist.

Fortunately in my heart I know otherwise [;)]

the.dark,

I'm afraid there is absolutely no evidence to show whether Jesus was gay or straight.  The fact that he surrounded himself with men only shows that in his time and locale, men only taught other men.  Women disciples would have been seen as scandalous.
Oops. I just read your post again and realised the "he" wasn't Christ but the man he healed. I'm not familiar with that story...do you happen to have the book and verse handy? I'd like to look that up.

However you do make a valid point in that for Christians, Christ renewed the covenant with God and effectively nullified the old one.  That's where it gets confusing...he worked on the Sabbath, yet he also said:
quote:


"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." (Matthew 5:17-18)


which is where it just gets confusing to me.

Aneirin,
I liked your post about the masculine looking for its complement in the feminine. That is something I strongly believe in - that we are all looking for our complement.  And I definitely subscribe to the yin/yang view of the world...I also see God as both nameless and genderless...like I said before YHWH and Christ are (IMO) 2 avatars of God, that has also been expressed in feminine form (Isis, Hera, and Juno as examples of the mother Goddess archetype, Venus, Aphrodite, Hathor as fertility goddesses, Artemis, Diana, Persephone as archetypal virgins, etc.) and I think that's what inspires the Catholic veneration of the Virgin Mary as well - she is virgin and mother and equals the balance between Masculine and Feminine.

Then again I always considered the Holy Spirit to be feminine as well.




Aneirin -> RE: Religion and D/s (3/11/2008 5:15:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster

Excellent post, Aneirin.

Thanks for contributing.

Six.



Thankyou.




Page: <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875