I really wanted to do a sex-positive stamp because I think sex-positivity is vitally important, and I couldn't find a lot of options already on offer. But I didn't really know how to design it, so I just threw something together. As I said before, I'm not that accomplished a digital artist.
Same with sex. Its been proven it relieves stress and aids in body regeneration. The fact America was stuck in this culture of self denial so long is troubling.
Between man and wife - it is neither a sin nor an immoral act. In Corintians, Paul talks about not denying your spouse sex because they may turn to other means that will drive them from God by doing immoral acts.
Any other sexual encounter - according to Christianity - yes.
"Thou shalt not commit adultery" That is the law for married persons, the NT says that when you have sex, you are bound in one flesh, one body ... it is for the married couple. To have sex with anyone other than your spouse is an immoral and sinful act and it is stated in many places in the Bible.
If your argument centred around sex not being "immoral", then it would be a different argument on my side. Each society and culture has it's own set of moral codes (most are very similar). Biblical morals and societal morals don't always align ... such as abstinence before marriage; society doesn't see it as immoral but it is seen as immoral Biblicaly.
I am an atheist. It's true that some religious people (especially Christians) see sex as a sin and an immoral act. My whole point is that I don't view it that way, and frankly, I think viewing it that way is dangerous and unhealthy.
Yes most Christians do (or should) see it as a sin or immoral because of their faith and obedience to God. This also extends to Jews and Muslims but to slightly differing degrees and view points.
You brought up sin and therefore your morality argument becomes religion based. Therefore religiously, sex out of marriage, is a sin and is immoral.
Not all people are religious or even of a certain religion and you are free to believe what you want ... but your argument (seemingly religion based) is wrong.
Fact - Religion and sex = immoral and sinful out of wedlock
Therefore - argument is not based on fact
As valid as your points are in a non religious context ... you cannot say that it is not immoral and not a sin ... it is both given the context you set your argument in.
I cannot begin to understand how viewing sex, in a religious setting, is unhealthy or even remotely dangerous. I think the real danger lies in expecting people to all think alike.
Here's my argument about religion: it's wrong.
I do not expect all people to think alike. In fact, even about sex, I respect a great diversity of viewpoints. And not all religious views of sex are problematic. But the belief that sex is a sin and is immoral, is a belief that does more harm than good, and I do not support it.
Do you seriously think I'm trying to argue that religion does not characterize sex in certain contexts as a sin? You're completely missing the point.
Here's my argument about your opinion about religion and sex - it's your opinion, not fact. Fact - religious texts say sex is immoral and a sin and it will be that way whether or not your opinion sides with or against it. Your argument is false because it says it is not a sin and not immoral when indeed it is. Remembering that immorality and sin is a religious concept and therefor bound by religious law of morality and sin.
Your opinion that religion is wrong does not change religious fact.
You can argue your opinion that religion is wrong.
Besides that ... why do you think it is unhealthy and dangerous that religion sees it as immoral and a sin?
I'm not missing your point. I get your point. My point is that your point is irrelevant to the discussion, and focusing so much on it just distracts from my original point, which is that I do not view sex as a sin because I think doing so is harmful. You're all caught up on trying to "prove" my argument is wrong because I said "sex is not a sin" when in fact some people believe that it is. It's like you swallowed a book on logic but completely missed the classes on reading context in human conversation.
Anyway, I think it's unhealthy because sex is a natural and important biological and psychological function, and I think it's dangerous because trying to control and repress other people's sexualities, and encouraging them to feel shame and guilt about their sexual desires and practices does very real harm to people on a wide scale.
It's because it is a sin out of wedlock - therefore your argument is wrong. Your opinion is another story completely.
If they are religious, and they do follow the rules of their holy books, they will find other ways. I honestly don't care what they do, what they do is between them and God. Fact still remains that your opinion about sin does not change the fact that it is still a sin. And again I need to stress the point - don't confuse the religion with the religious.
It's not unhealthy not to have sex, for glories sake, what ever happened to masturbation? How would you know what you're missing if you never had sex to begin with? If you are religious, you know you follow the rules of God and you will do all you can to not "fall from grace".
What you percieve as natural, they feel must be repressed, so why are you trying to tell them otherwise? You don't like them telling you to adhere to their religious practices, so why are you telling them not to adhere to theirs? You are just as preachy. You might not like it, and quite frankly, it doesn't matter. If they bug you with their beliefs, don't tell them their beliefs are wrong, tell them that you don't adhere to the religion, therefore their laws of sin do not apply to you, and your moral codes are different
That's why I can't just ignore the fact that Christians say sex is a sin/immoral.
Is is sinful and immoral. If you encounter that argument, tell them that it is sinful and immoral not to burn leaf eating moths on Fridays. Yes, stupid example, but that's how stupid their example is to you. You don't believe in God, so tell them that their moral codes have no bearing on you. Fact still remains that t is a sin (because sin is a religious concept and not a societal one) and it is immoral (because based on this argument, immorality is tied to your religion argument.
You say you ignore it, but you don't. You appose it, which is fine, but you take it further and you tell them the exact opposite of their religious facts.
I don't live in America, I never ever want to live there with all those arrogant, up their own asses people. I don't care to interact with them.
However, when I see stamps like this saying something in a religion isn't actually that, I will argue it. Your argument revolves around false facts, end of.
Hahaha, no, sorry, not "end of".
The day that people who believe harmful things like "sex is sinful/immoral" are content to keep those beliefs to themselves and not insist on infecting the rest of society with their dangerous beliefs (Christianity is emphatically NOT a "live and let live" sort of belief system), is the day that I will stop being concerned about spreading my own opposition to those harmful beliefs.
I mean, Jesus Christ, deciding on the day of my confirmation that I do not, in fact, believe in God or any of the bullshit lies my preachers tried to teach me, unfortunately did not render me free from the psychological abuse that had been implanted in my brain, that to this day, makes me feel guilty for enjoying something as beautiful as an orgasm. I believe that everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, but an entire system of beliefs, which includes many harmful and unnatural ones, that makes a point to infect innocent minds with its poison, is one that DESERVES open ridicule.
Also, masturbation is a form of sexual activity (and one that has had a long history of being the target of shaming campaigns, despite its relative safety compared to sexual acts that occur between two or more people).
Don't confuse religion with the religious. There is often a big difference.