Saintly Sluttiness?

by patio34 29 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • patio34


    Nice to hear from you and I'm glad you enjoy the subject.

    I just thought of something: if the above article has any merit, then no wonder extramarital sex has always been so common. Humans have been trying to legislate against a trait that evolution has naturally selected for. Like swimming upstream. As the song says: Don't cross the river if you can't swim the tide....


  • Mindchild

    After viewing the well thought out and interesting posts on this thread, I ran across an article in today's news that talked about how major social changes are underway in the USA regarding being single or married.

    The link to the article is here: but I've copied it below. Some points that were interesting to me are highlighted.

    Sex, intimacy and family life in the United States

    A study examines how intimate relationships are formed

    Chicago, IL Major social changes over the past fifty years in the United States have profoundly reshaped how intimate unions are formed. As sexual ties have increasingly become decoupled from marriage, the nature and formation of relationships have taken on new forms and meaning--with significant implications for different subgroups in the population, and for the quality of life in general.

    These are some of the findings from research conducted by Professor Edward O. Laumann, Jenna Mahay, and Yoosik Youm of the University of Chicago, that will be presented at a session of the Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association in Chicago on August 16th. The conclusions are drawn from analyses of data from the 1992 National Health and Social Life Survey (NHSLS) and the 1995 Chicago Health and Social Life Survey (CHSLS).

    Among other study findings are these:

    • With the declining age of sexual maturation over the course of the last century, the increasing age at first marriage, the high likelihood of divorce, and the declining rates of remarriage, Americans currently face the prospect of spending nearly half of their adult life between 18 and 59 single (with no sex partner) or in noncoresidential dating relationships.

    • About one third of African Americans and Hispanics who are "Never Married, Single" have cohabited in the past, while less than one quarter of whites in this category have ever cohabited. In addition, among those who are married, 16 percent of African Americans cohabited with someone other than their spouse before they were married, compared to only 7 percent of whites and 1 percent of Hispanics.

    • Men and women experience very different trajectories with respect to various relationship statuses across the life course: While there is some indication that women are catching up with men (e.g., in terms of engaging in premarital sex with partners they do not intend to marry), women are much more likely than men to spend longer periods of time in single status, especially after the age of 40.

    • Wide variations exist in the prevalence of specific types of sexually transmitted diseases (STD) among different subgroups of the population. For example, rates of gonorrhea among African Americans are 20 to 30 times higher than for whites, while rates of viral STDs are highest among highly educated whites. In order to better understand the dynamics of how STDs are transmitted, dating and single status relationships must also be studied more systematically.

    The authors argue that, In order to better understand the dynamics of how relationships are formed, researchers must broaden their perspective to include singlehood status and dating relationships--an approach especially important for accounting for the growing discrepancies in the formation of unions among African Americans, Hispanics and whites.

    Laumann is the author of several major works on the subject of sex, love, and health, including a two-volume book, The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States, and Sex in America (both published in 1994), and coeditor with Robert T. Michael of Sex, Love, and Health in America (2000)--all published by the University of Chicago Press.

    Kind Regards,


  • butalbee

    Seeing the title of this thread I just had to click on it. Just had to.

  • RWC

    This post is an example of how far people will go to rationalize their behavior and justify their actions. I can hear it now: "I am sorry I fooled around on you honey, it wasn't me it was evolution. I couldn't help myself"

    Men have been trying that argument for years with no sucess and rightfully so. Now that a study has come out that claims that a few tribal cultures profess that women need to have multiple sex partners, the slutty lifestyle will become saintly. I would venture to guess that the idea that conception takes more than one man was an argument first professed by the men of that culture ( not unlike the Morman idea that multiple wifes was God's idea)

    A society that not only accepts, but actually applaudes and encourages multiple sex partners and at the same time takes steps to destroy the family which ours is doing today, is on the road to destruction. We will reap what we are sowing just like we are now, with the rise of teenage pregnacy and the epidemics of sexually transmitted diseases.

    No matter how you attempt to justify it, multiple sex partners outside of a marriage is not a heathly practice for the individual or society. And without a moral compass there is no way to determine what type of behavior is "responsible". The moral compass provided by Christianity establishes values that promote the sanctity of marriage, that values committment, that encourages family security, and protects children. These values will never be enhanced by a society that promotes promiscuity. Nor with they be replaced by science.

    God Bless

  • Satanus

    Right, rwc

    Most of the great men of the ot had multiple partners. They weren't very considerate to their kids either. Some of them prostituted their kids. Abraham, the father of your faith, contemplated sacrificing his beloved son to your god. He had endless family problems as well. I could go on about david, saul, isaiah, etc etc. Biblists who ignore these things are like someone who walks around w one eye blinded, one deaf ear, one crippled leg, one missing arm, and claims he's in a better situation than everyone else.


  • Satanus


    By predicting destruction, you totally ignore the positive bonding/ally effects of female promiscuity.


  • RWC

    Saint Satan,

    You are right when you say that the Bible is full of imperfect men. You should however do two things before you criticize them- one is to follow through on the complete story and two is to understand the teaching that is evident in the story. As for Abraham, the story is actually very beautiful and is an example of what God was willing to do when he sent Jesus to die for our sins. If you read it carefully you will see how heartbroken Abraham is at the notion that his only son, who he clearly loved very much, should be sacrificed. Issac, who also clearly loves his father obeys him willingly. And both of them, who love God know that he will provide for them, which he does. The story is one of a test of faith and devotion. It is not a story of human sacrifice and should not be portrayed as such.

    As for David, he did do some horrible things beyond adultry. He sent the husband of his lover into battle to be killed so he could marry her. But the story doesn't end there. David had to pay for his sins and he had to confess them The story of David's life is one of a sinful man who loves the Lord and through his repentance and acknowledgement of his wrongdoing is used by God to do great things. He is an example to us all.

    The problems thee people faced in their lifes as a result of their sinful behavior is not ignored. Far from ignoring them we can learn from them.They are examples of how sinful actions can cause sorrow, pain, and can destroy the family. Their lives prove the point I was making. A lifestyle like that that is attempted to be justified and glorified will only lead to pain and destruction. The men of the old testament who you mentioned saw the error of their ways and repented and their familes were better for it.

    With all this said, how does their actions disprove that the morality taught by the Christian faith promotes the values I expressed earlier?

    By the way, even if I was walking around with all of the physical infirmities that you mentioned, I would believe I was in a better situation than most if my faith was strong and I was a good moral person who cared for his spouse and his family.I would still be happy with myself. (Note I said better situation, not better)

    God Bless

  • Satanus


    I rest my case.


  • jgnat

    I have chosen to abide by the Judeo-Christian ethic of sticking to one partner, with limited success. Regardless, I still believe it is the best option for women and children. I think my daughter would have higher esteem today, if she had a strong male father figure who had loved and cared for her. If I had relations with a dozen men, any of which might be the father, would they all stick around to raise the fruit of their labours?

    Even the slutty animals understand their familial obligations. Common English Sparrows are "doing it" in the snow before there is even a hint of spring, and are hogging the best nesting sites from then on. Regardless how temporary their "marriage" is, both partners hang around until the children are grown, sacrificing their own health and well-being for the next generation (watch those skinny parents hop!).

    There is something noble and lovely about watching Canada Geese, who mate for life. They are devoted and loyal to death. I know I am capable of loving that deep, and sincerely hope there is someone that could care for me that much, as well.

  • RWC

    SS- I'll admit you lost me with "I rest my case". If you think that my post proved your point than either I misunderstood your first one or you misunderstood me.

    As for the positive effects of female promiscuity, other than some happy men, I don't see any. I think that you are assuming that humans, with far more emotional capability than animals and with the abililty to reason beyond survival would respond the same way to their women becoming promiscuious. I don't believe that most men would accept that in such away that we would bond together. The invevitable result would be the destruction of the family. How many people do you know who feel better that their partner was unfaithful and thank them for it telling them it was good for the children?

    Jgnat- from your post it appeared that your spouse, not you failed at the idea of sticking to one partner. If that is the case, do not feel that it was your fault. Your daughter can still have a good self esteem if she learns from you what she should expect in her mate, even if that person fails to meet that expectation. But I agree with you that it is important for girls to have a strong father figure in their life. If that is not possible, a strong mother who can show them by example how they should expect to be treated may be the best you can do.

    God Bless

Share this