05 Oct '05 15:10>1 edit
Originally posted by sasquatch672From what I see there, I'd have to say that these people have a very unhealthy view of the human body and sexuality. This is not atypical among fundamentalists of many persuasions. The body is a fallen entity, a carnal temptation into all sorts of depravity. Sure, they'll respond with the customary "God made sex good," but this refers only to sex/body images that occur within the explicit context of a husband-wife relationship. Further such images/ideas must not discussed in public other than to affirm that sex between a husband and a wife is good, and certainly nothing explicitly or implicitly sexual/carnal should ever be SEEN! This leads to all sorts of wickedness.
Not sure if I'm going to get the range of opinions I'm looking for in the debates forum, so I repeated the thread here. While this is not strictly a "spirituality" thread, I figured I'd get a little traction here. I apologize in advance for anyone judging this out of place.
So apparently there's a Victoria's Secret store in D.C. that has a di ...[text shortened]... me here, or am I just nuts? I could not abide this kind of attitude in a mate for five minutes.
What can you say? The wackos in this article are the same type of people who get their panties in a bunch about Barney the Purple Dinosaur and SpongeBob Squarepants. I'm just glad I'm not one of their kids.
What I think is more fascinating is that they are sufficiently disturbed by their eroticism from looking at a mannequin. Yikes. Try telling your kids about that!
Edit: Yes, they are morons. I do not give this people the time of day, well . . . except at RHP.