Posted on 06/22/2014 1:00:23 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Hmm, still, I’d prefer to wait and see if it actually happens. I’m ruthlessly devoted to “innocent until proven guilty” and I certainly don’t like it when the gun grabbers push the idea that I should have to prove my innocence.
Something else occurs to me on the matter. If it’s one day ruled that underage children can consent to sex, then all those organizations working against child soldiers and child laborers are going to be SOL, and I doubt I’m the only one intelligent enough to see that, so that’s another major obstacle against pedophilia becoming legalized.
That’s what all the abortions at Planned Parenthood are for. 80 % of the moms are less than 18 years old. About a million child rapes a year where the evidence is killed.
You’re missing the point about Abishag. She was to try to arouse King David sexually in order to have him rally his failing will to live. There’s a concept in traditional medicine called shumanitism. It’s considered a treatment for this sort of thing. So, no, it was definitely using sexuality (and King David was of course very highly sexed) for medicinal purposes.
I would He had been clearer in several areas. Though we can ascertain within morality to be sure, and by ‘equivalence’ in the ‘mathematical’ sense.
One of the things Protestants accuse the Church of is replacing biblical practices and replacing them with pagan ones that the early Church absorbed from the Greco-Roman heathen culture of the day. I think that is almost all wrong - BUT . . .
If there's one place where the Church rather explicitly took on a pagan cultural norm it is in the notion of mandatory monogamy. The Romans were very serious about monogamy (although they allowed divorce, which I understand was no uncommon). St. Augustine addressed the issue, and to paraphrase he basically said that polygamy was allowed to the ancient Israelites because they needed the increased fertility but now we don't need the increased fertility. Also, God doesn't require polygamy so it's not a question of basic faith and morals so it's one of those areas where we Christians can and should accommodate the larger pagan culture as we, in effect, need to pick our fights carefully with them.
My favorite Protestant theologian, R. J. Rushdoony, wrote (I think correctly) that some limited form of polygamy should be allowed as a concession to human frailty, much as we allow divorce. There isn't much difference, after all, from a man marrying one woman after the next and paying child support and spousal support to his exes as we have now and polygamy whereby all would agree to share the man sexually as well as financially.
“You’re missing the point about Abishag. She was to try to arouse King David sexually in order to have him rally his failing will to live.”
The scripture is painfully clear that she was nothing more than a glorified hot water bottle to keep a very old man warm....and NOT in the sexual manner. However, there are those perverse enough to suggest otherwise. Whatever, it certainly is NOT a sanction for polygamy. I think you have well named yourself in that your words are asinine.
Oh, c'mon. She was the most beautiful young woman that there was at the time. If she was just a "hot water bottle" why go through all the trouble of finding the most attractive woman known to them to lie in bed with the old guy? Why not just give the ailing King a real hot water bottle, or maybe some heated rocks or something? Or maybe a guy? Why not?
Your position is patently absurd.
BTW, some say that Abishag was the inspiration for the young woman in the Song of Songs. And that thing was about as sexual as it can be.
So, the "human hot water bottle" thing is ludicrous.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.