Harvard University Holds Annual Sex Week

a reply to: TheValeyard

True. But those divorces are by people who don't fear God or consider his moral laws on marriage. Most of them are because of adultery which God also condemns. And many because of differences that can be fixed if the marriage mates really were honorable and kept their word. Marriage is a vow. It isn't something to be used until you get tired of it and thrown away. So the problems with broken marriages, and suffering children because of the consequences are not do to God. Actually they are do to the same problem. Disobeying God's moral law with regards to sex and marriage, and keeping the marriage bed undefiled and honorable. And once giving a vow, keeping that vow. Things getting rough is no excuse for breaking ones oath. A marriage mate when given an oath, can expect their marriage partner to honor and uphold their word and oath:

"Let marriage be honorable among all, and let the marriage bed be without defilement, for God will judge sexually immoral people and adulterers."-Hebrews 13:4.

"What you vow, pay. Better for you not to vow than to vow and not pay. Do not allow your mouth to cause you to sin, and do not say before the angel that it was a mistake. Why make the true God indignant over what you say so that he has to destroy the work of your hands?"-Ecclesiastes 5:4-6.

People who uphold God's moral standards as found in the Bible in their marriage find satisfaction and unity. Jehovah's Witnesses for example, hold God's word as sacred. And they have a divorce rate of around 2% compared to the 50% among the population at large.

a reply to: randomuser2034


Ok, what in the hell do we need to fear God for, can you answer that? really religious has lived its useful slavery times, people have liberated themselves of the hold man created no a God.

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: Terpene
Why is it that the countries with the most open policies on sexual education have the Lowest sexual violence rates?

I don't consider a workshop on porn, anal 101, and sex toys to be 'sex education'. It's just filth. Sex education would be ... 'here's a vagina, here's a penis, put them together and you get a baby' kind of thing.

Maybe they don't want to have babies because they know the markets are screwed and don't wanna raise their kids poor while they attempt to pay off their student debt.

Not everyone wants babies, you know. Even married people still pull out until they're ready.
And sex toys and anal are filth? Fine, don't use sex toys and don't do anal. I don't like anal either. That's why I don't do it! LOL.
Problem solved.
But these people are consenting adults.
We also have separation of church and state,
and I know you're glad for that when it comes to Islam and Scientology,
so lighten up, Francis!

You might think those things are filth, but they have the freedom to NOT think that.
If it was an elementary school I'd be on your side, but it's not, so...

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: randomuser2034


Ok, what in the hell do we need to fear God for, can you answer that? really religious has lived its useful slavery times, people have liberated themselves of the hold man created no a God.

Because he is the universal sovereign. And he loves us, as he has proven. The very fact that because of God we exist is reason enough. Just as a child should always respect their parents for the very same reason.

"You are worthy, Jehovah our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power, because you created all things, and because of your will they came into existence and were created.”-Revelation 4:11.

When I say fear God, that is not a morbid fear of trembling because you are scared, but a wholesome fear of respect, out of love not wanting to disobey his word knowing that it would lead to our own downfall. Knowing that God's will and his word are for our good and our benefit, but not ours alone, but for the whole world's. Do not think I'm trying to scare you with hellfire or something. That is not what I mean. In fact I authored a thread on how Hellfireis a lie previously.

a reply to: FlyersFan

a reply to: FlyersFan

Firstly, they aren’t kids.

Secondly, don’t like what they teach don’t go there.
You know what other classes Harvard has? Religious studies. Ohhhh imagine that, the freedom to choose what you want to learn..

a reply to: randomuser2034


What you did is called the "No True Scotsman Fallacy".
Your argument, to summarize, was that "true Christians" wouldn't be getting a divorce.
I could just as easily say "No TRUE psychopath would ever be a serial killer."
What is a TRUE Christian? It's whatever you decide it is in any moment to serve your bias.
Christians still get divorced.

My parents were devout and very fundamentalist Christians and they still got divorced.
It may be against Christian doctrine, but that doesn't actually stop people,
and divorcees are still in fact Christian, even if they do "sin" according to doctrine.
Therefore, "True Christian" is meaningless in this context.

In terms of figures: 2021 all major polling data showed that over 60 percent of americans identified as Christian,
yet between 40 to 50% of first marriages still ended in divorce.

We could continue arguing about polling data, but what you have most critically missed was that before divorce was made more socially acceptable, people were stuck in abusive marriages.

Rate of IPV (intimate partner violence) in 2023 is between 1 in 3 to as low as 1 in 4, but from 1994 to 2010, the rate of domestic violence decreased by more than 60%. With a 96% response rate to polling, 86.2% identified as Christians in 1994,
compared to the present day figure of 63%.

This means it could be equally argued that the social acceptance of divorce, while perhaps being somewhat tied to lessening of Christianity,
also seems to have lessened domestic violence instances among married couples, or even society at large.

It is also known that children who witness violence between their parents have drastically increased risk of mental health issues and mood disorders, and are more likely to become domestic abusers themselves.

There is also no indication that married couples in the 90s weren't cheating. I heard about a few instances myself. What we do know though, is that if your husband cheated on you and beat you, you felt obliged to stay with them and keep taking it, to avoid judgements.

So even the values you cherish have significant social downsides.
Just FYI.

It sounds better to me than the sex ed I got in high school. It was titled ''Sex Ed 101- Wham-Bam-Thankyou- Maam
'' and taught in the boys locker room.

originally posted by: TheValeyard
a reply to: randomuser2034


What you did is called the "No True Scotsman Fallacy".
Your argument, to summarize, was that "true Christians" wouldn't be getting a divorce.
I could just as easily say "No TRUE psychopath would ever be a serial killer."
What is a TRUE Christian? It's whatever you decide it is in any moment to serve your bias.
Christians still get divorced.

My parents were devout and very fundamentalist Christians and they still got divorced.
It may be against Christian doctrine, but that doesn't actually stop people,
and divorcees are still in fact Christian, even if they do "sin" according to doctrine.
Therefore, "True Christian" is meaningless in this context.

In terms of figures: 2021 all major polling data showed that over 60 percent of americans identified as Christian,
yet between 40 to 50% of first marriages still ended in divorce.

We could continue arguing about polling data, but what you have most critically missed was that before divorce was made more socially acceptable, people were stuck in abusive marriages.

Rate of IPV (intimate partner violence) in 2023 is between 1 in 3 to as low as 1 in 4, but from 1994 to 2010, the rate of domestic violence decreased by more than 60%. With a 96% response rate to polling, 86.2% identified as Christians in 1994,
compared to the present day figure of 63%.

This means it could be equally argued that the divorce rate, while perhaps being somewhat tied to lack of Christianity,
may also have lessened domestic violence instances among married couples, or even society at large.

Just FYI.

I really wasn't advocating or condoning nominal "Christians." The Bible speaks of these so-called pious and devote that have an appearance of Godliness, but it says that they prove false:

But know this, that in the last days critical times hard to deal with will be here. For men...[will have] an appearance of godliness but [prove] false to its power; and from these turn away. From among these arise men who slyly work their way into households and captivate weak women loaded down with sins, led by various desires, always learning and yet never able to come to an accurate knowledge of truth.-2 Timothy 3:1, 2, 5, 6.

Like I said among Jehovah's Witnesses the divorce rate is around 2%. It is very low. And that is because they adhere to the high standards in the Bible. And as the world in general (included nominal Christians of the Churches of Christendom, and her clergy) sink to new depths moral decay and filth, God's people maintain the elevated moral standards of God and prove that they are better than the morally degraded morality that the world and the clergy of Christendom teach and condone.

a reply to: randomuser2034


Yes and there are Reddit forums about Jehovah's Witnesses suffering from domestic violence who feel they can't leave.
Look, I'm not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I'll admit there are some good things about Christianity,
but there are also some bad things.

Women being expected to be subservient to men is one of those bad things.
Why?
For the same reason men shouldn't be subservient to women.
People are flawed, and sometimes abusive.

You may say the Bible doesn't advocate for woman-beating, but...
1. The bible says if a woman is raped, then the rapist has to marry her, because he ruined her market value. That means the woman is stuck with her rapist.
2. The bible says period blood is evil, and if a woman gets period blood on anything inside city walls, we're supposed to put her to death.
3. The bible explicitly says women are supposed to obey their husbands and do whatever they say, and be servants.

Some say the old testament doesn't count, but that's not biblical either. The bible's new covenant only says that sins can be forgiven by mere repentance to Jesus, rather than blood sacrifice.
Also note that most marriages when the bible was written, were arranged.

Fundamentalist Christianity always was and still is, mysogynistic.

Additionally, and perhaps most critically, the bible never explicitly decries sex outside marriage.
It only decries "sexual immorality" and gay sex between males.



The only 2 verses I can find that could even be construed as decrying premarital sex are these two:

Hebrews 13:4, “Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.”
THAT ONLY SAYS NOT TO CHEAT ON YOUR SPOUSE, to keep your marriage bed clean.

#2:


1 Corinthians 7:2, which says, “But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.”

That only says not to have sex with someone else's wife or husband; again, speaking against cheating.
So, while to be faithfully married would be in alignment with this passage, the bible actually says nothing specifically against unmarried couples having exclusive sex.

And just to be clear: I don't personally care what the bible says either way.
I'm just saying if that's what you're stuck on, it doesn't actually mandate that.

a reply to: TheValeyard

I didn't mean for this to turn into a prolonged discussion. Just to show how God's view of sex, as he is the originator of it is worthy of consideration. Whether or not people will apply them in their lives is up to them, as we are all free moral agents. And even if the whole world disregards God's laws, that doesn't annul them. The state and condition the world is in is a testament to this fact. And as one of the scriptures I quoted above states God will judge sexually immoral people (the Greek word translated here is pornia and refers to any all all sex acts outside of the bond of holy matrimony.)

I respect your right to believe and do whatever you want. God is the judge in the end.

originally posted by: randomuser2034
a reply to: TheValeyard

I didn't mean for this to turn into a prolonged discussion. Just to show how God's view of sex, as he is the originator of it is worthy of consideration. Whether or not people will apply them in their lives is up to them, as we are all free moral agents. And even if the whole world disregards God's laws, that doesn't annul them. The state and condition the world is in is a testament to this fact. And as one of the scriptures I quoted above states God will judge sexually immoral people (the Greek word translated here is pornia and refers to any all all sex acts outside of the bond of holy matrimony.)

I respect your right to believe and do whatever you want. God is the judge in the end.

Then I respect your right to believe all that. Religious debates should always end with such civility.
Thank you for ending it that way. It means a lot.

From what I gathered, they have held this event every year since 2012. Looking at past event schedules, the event content has become more LGBQT over time, and now more than ever.

Fits the times and the mentality of the "students" they're cranking out of these elitist cesspools. That way, they can better prepare themselves for the degenerates they'll work beside in the real world who are seasoned child abusers.

So, if you're a teetering child molester riding the fence about full committal, be sure to come by the event between 5-6:30pm for more information on how you can learn to hone and accept you're proclivities. Be proud! Be brave!
/s

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: marg6043

Why is it that the countries with the most open policies on sexual education have the Lowest sexual violence rates?

Until that trend doesn't change there is no argument against sexual liberation...

Why does everything turn into a business, should be the question, but alas economy is our true God...

There's a big difference between sexual liberation and perverted degeneracy.
Let's be honest,anal sex is very bad for the participants health.

originally posted by: glen200376returns

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: marg6043

Why is it that the countries with the most open policies on sexual education have the Lowest sexual violence rates?

Until that trend doesn't change there is no argument against sexual liberation...

Why does everything turn into a business, should be the question, but alas economy is our true God...

There's a big difference between sexual liberation and perverted degeneracy.
Let's be honest,anal sex is very bad for the participants health.

So is fast food.

originally posted by: TheValeyard

originally posted by: glen200376returns

originally posted by: Terpene
a reply to: marg6043

Why is it that the countries with the most open policies on sexual education have the Lowest sexual violence rates?

Until that trend doesn't change there is no argument against sexual liberation...

Why does everything turn into a business, should be the question, but alas economy is our true God...

There's a big difference between sexual liberation and perverted degeneracy.
Let's be honest,anal sex is very bad for the participants health.

So is fast food.

Sexual liberation and perverted degeneracy is in the eye of the beholder.

a reply to: glen200376returns

There's a big difference between sexual liberation and perverted degeneracy.

No there isn't... the only diffrence is when sexually liberated one has less bias towards the many different sexual. Practices and chuckles about the ones still judging....

anal sex is very bad for the participants health.

So are candies.

But honestly how would you know?
I had hemroids one time and anal massage was recommended...

originally posted by: FlyersFan
Harvard University, with a reputation for being one of the top schools in the country, maybe even THE top school, is holding it's annual SEX WEEK.

It is NOT being run by Harvard University, it is being run by one of the 500 student organisations at Harvard.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Faux outrage.

These aren't exactly children attending. That fact that it's Harvard might have tipped you off.

originally posted by: FlyersFan
I have come to the conclusion that I don't think a Harvard 'education' is all that healthy for a young adult ... all things considered.

Does it say anywhere that the education is directed at children? Based on what I read it was at young adults. So what's the problem with learning about sex? Whats the problem with consenting adults learning about sex? Are you a prude? do you use words like 'flabberghasted' and 'golly'?

I'm glad I never grew up under the fascist rule of a relgious upbringing, which has allowed me to have an open and enjoyable relationship with sex.