Will there ever be a tit watchtower?

jambon1

We have had oral sex, etc, etc........

Will they ever bring out an article that discusses what you can & can't do with a pair of fun bags?

watson

That is a strong probability. I am concerned that many women use their "twins" for things other than nursing.

Yes strictly speaking they are for nursing young - not for men to stare at/feel/tweak/grope/squeeze or kiss. The WT magazine will continue to warn the spiritually weak of this. Remember the Song of Solomon is allegorical and was just poetry for the Shullamite. In the anti-typical fulfillment this means we have to seek nourishment only from the faithful and discreet slave

nvrgnbk

In all seriousness, you raise an excellent question, jambon1.

If the basic objection to oral sex is that it supposedly originates from lesbian/homosexual practice, the same could be said for sex acts involving the breasts of both sexes.

What of kissing?

Lesbians and homosexuals kiss.

Is that wrong too?

Good catch!

That this appears absurd at first glance only reaffirms that the JW position on oral sex is absurd as well.

OnTheWayOut

IF THEY EVER say that the breasts are for nourishing infants and they limit any
kind of fun that they should be used for, I will either drag my wife out of the cult
over her objections or I will divorce her using this as the issue, while seeking an
attorney that wants to use public opinion.

They have taken so much away from me. I won't let them have that, too.

stillajwexelder

exactly nvrgnbk. It is a total non-sequitor to say "because homosexuals do it, it is wrong"

Homosexuals kiss - so is that wrong?

Homosexuals squeeze and touch and feel so is that wrong?

Lesbians squeeze and kiss a womans breast - so is that wrong?

So why - if I can kiss a womans face and lips and breast and stomach and back -why can I not kiss her clitoris?

Just what the hell is the problem?

Frustrated old men in brooklyn - that is what is wrong

nvrgnbk

Just what the hell is the problem?

They're a bunch of WASP's, with a token black man and I think an Italian thrown in for a little spice.

They want so very badly to make the rest of the world live like Puritans.

It is therefore sheer British jingoism which points to America as the country of Puritanic provincialism. It is quite true that our life is stunted by Puritanism, and that the latter is killing what is natural and healthy in our impulses. But it is equally true that it is to England that we are indebted for transplanting this spirit on American soil. It was bequeathed to us by the Pilgrim fathers. Fleeing from persecution and oppression, the Pilgrims of Mayflower fame established in the New World a reign of Puritanic tyranny and crime. The history of New England, and especially of Massachusetts, is full of the horrors that have turned life into gloom, joy and despair, naturalness into disease, honesty and truth into hideous lies and hypocrisies. The ducking-stool and whipping-post, as well as numerous other devices of torture, were the favorite English methods for American purification.
Boston, the city of culture, has gone down in the annals of Puritanism as the "Bloody Town." It rivaled Salem, even, in her cruel persecution of unauthorized religious opinions. On the now famous Common a half-naked woman, with a baby in her arms, was publicly whipped for the crime of free speech; and on the same spot Mary Dyer, another Quaker woman, was hanged in 1659. In fact, Boston has been the scene of more than one wanton crime committed by Puritanism. Salem, in the summer of 1692, killed eighteen people for witchcraft. Nor was Massachusetts alone in driving out the devil by fire and brimstone. As Canning justly said: "The Pilgrim fathers infested the New World to redress the balance of the Old." The horrors of that period have found their most supreme expression in the American classic, The Scarlet Letter.
Puritanism no longer employs the thumbscrew and lash; but it still has a most pernicious hold on the minds and feelings of the American people. Naught else can explain the power of a Comstock. Like the Torquemadas of ante-bellum days, Anthony Comstock is the autocrat of American morals; he dictates the standards of good and evil, of purity and vice. Like a thief in the night he sneaks into the private lives of the people, into their most intimate relations. The system of espionage established by this man Comstock puts to shame the infamous Third Division of the Russian secret police. Why does the public tolerate such an outrage on its liberties? Simply because Comstock is but the loud expression of the Puritanism bred in the Anglo-Saxon blood, and from whose thraldom even liberals have not succeeded in fully emancipating themselves. The visionless and leaden elements of the old Young Men's and Women's Christian Temperance Unions, Purity Leagues, American Sabbath Unions, and the Prohibition Party, with Anthony Comstock as their patron saint, are the grave diggers of American art and culture.
Europe can at least boast of a bold art and literature which delve deeply into the social and sexual problems of our time, exercising a severe critique of all our shams. As with a surgeon's knife every Puritanic carcass is dissected, and the way thus cleared for man's liberation from the dead weights of the past. But with Puritanism as the constant check upon American life, neither truth nor sincerity is possible. Nothing but gloom and mediocrity to dictate human conduct, curtail natural expression, and stifle our best impulses. Puritanism in this the twentieth century is as much the enemy of freedom and beauty as it was when it landed on Plymouth Rock. It repudiates, as something vile and sinful, our deepest feelings; but being absolutely ignorant as to the real functions of human emotions, Puritanism is itself the creator of the most unspeakable vices.
The entire history of asceticism proves this to be only too true. The Church, as well as Puritanism, has fought the flesh as something evil; it had to be subdued and hidden at all cost.
http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/goldman/aando/puritanism.html

stillajwexelder

If sex is so wrong, why did god give it us?

nvrgnbk

If sex is so wrong, why did god give it us?

Well, stilla.

Jehovah gave us the "good" kind of sex.

It's the influence of Satan and the demons, and the "sex-crazed" world they dominate, that makes us want to have "bad" sex.

LOL!

Isn't that basically what they taught us?

Abandoned

Yeah, when is the watchtower going to try and take the fun out of funbags?

Will there ever be a tit watchtower?

Share this