Married and flirty....?
Replies
-
0 -
MeeseeksAndDestroy wrote: »
We are splitting hairs now...who said you have to be the same person. SMH0 -
This content has been removed.
-
My nose ring was two years ago before I started working in the hospital and had to take it out, and I have dimples when i smile0
-
This content has been removed.
-
Ironandwine69 wrote: »MeeseeksAndDestroy wrote: »I hate to rain on the religious debate parade but @rickiimarieee is your new pp a completely different person?
she likes to keep things fresh and unflirty....sheesh
I'm so confused, I can't keep *kitten* straight anymore on who's doing who. I mean who's who
I keep things fresh..I'll do you next ..I mean you...are ...I like your abs0 -
Now that we’ve concluded flirting is not cheating maybe we can decide what is cheating. Just the tip?1
-
Ironandwine69 wrote: »MeeseeksAndDestroy wrote: »I hate to rain on the religious debate parade but @rickiimarieee is your new pp a completely different person?
she likes to keep things fresh and unflirty....sheesh
I'm so confused, I can't keep *kitten* straight anymore on who's doing who. I mean who's who
I keep things fresh..I'll do you next ..I mean you...are ...I like your abs
Who knew I'd score so early in the morning!!!0 -
This content has been removed.
-
-
This content has been removed.
-
cabronlobos wrote: »Ironandwine69 wrote: »MeeseeksAndDestroy wrote: »
We are splitting hairs now...who said you have to be the same person. SMH
Hey I'm really the Rock, I just put up a pathetic weakling avatar to go unbothered....until now. Feel free to flirt now
I love your lightswitch...1 -
I'm against the tip...now...is that flirting?0
-
I draw women like bees to pollen when I go out without my wife so I try not to go out too often without her. I also don’t have much self control so I don’t put myself in those positions because of that.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
Pretentious_Loser wrote: »I would never flirt. I don't even flirt with my dear wife. People that flirt are insecure about their checkbooks and have wives that are less than desirable. I've only ever made one flirty comment in my entire life and it was to a matching pair of socks and tie.
I also have talked to a wealthy person once, they had a face.
but you are so sexy when you talk about that thing when you are talking0 -
Cutaway_Collar wrote: »Renaissance_Turtle:
Nothing to do with the Bible.
Even atheists adhere to monogamy and some sense of loyalty to spouses. It’s human nature. It is the norm in all countries in the world. Surely it is not based on a selective religious system. Humans are naturally inclined to take a life partner and live with them with some sense of commitment.
Your defence of polygamy citing the Bible sets a dangerous precedent. Deuteronomy says a lot of weird things and there is also a lot of underage marriages or unions in the OT. Would you defend child marriages in the same way?
Well, first lets get one thing strait. No where in my post did I defend polygamy. I actually said it was a stupid idea & even started off with the fact that it was not God's desire. It's just a permissible marital position. Stating a fact that something is permissible is not promotion. Promoting would be me coming in here saying that everyone needs a second or third spouse because the bible says so. Jumping to a straw man argument about child marriages isn't bolstering your argument as it has nothing to do with the topic at hand & does nothing but expose your ignorance of scripture to me.
Second, I'm going to guess that you've never been outside of a Westernized country or if so, then not for any length of time aside from a short vacation. Polygamy is a very common thing in many parts of the world. I'm guessing you don't personally know any missionaries serving in Africa, Asia or the Middle-East. I have friends in every part of the world, they have talked about stuff like this when they come home to raise support. One of them told me a story about a chief in one of the villages he travels too that had become a Christian & spent some time learning from him. A couple of months later the guy came to him distraught about divorcing & sending three of his wives away because he had inadvertently taught the man that he should only have one wife if he was going to be a leader. He had no idea the chief had four wifes when he was teaching him. He was distraught because he missed two of them & the children that he sent away with all three of them. There are a lot of cultures and groups of people even some here in the us that have wives or mistresses that aren't legally acknowledged because laws forbid it even where the culture does not. This is also another example of the church influencing legal statutes in places where they have little cultural influence.
If you don't believe it's common, maybe info from HRAF published in their Ethnographic Atlas will shed some light on it. Out of nearly 1250 unique cultures & societies in the world, less than 190 of them are strictly monogamous. Over a thousand of them have either frequent or occasional polygamy. You talk of atheists adhering monogamy, this because they are largely concentrated in Westernized societies where the legal & culture norm affect their personal moral code. It has nothing to do with their "human nature". Human nature is a fundamental disposition or trait it cannot be altered & is something endemic to all humans. Marriage is neither a disposition not a trait. It is a learned behavior based on the culture or multiple cultures from which a person observed & gathered influenced by as they matured & developed.
Oh, and for the record this country was built on the backs of many married "children" as well as married & single adults. Most of those child spouses were in the neighborhood of being 14-16 year old brides & grooms. It was a pretty common thing in our nation's history up until the last 100 years. I find this idea asinine just like I do polygamy, but I refuse to say something is unbiblical when I cannot back it up based on what I know of scripture regardless of how abhorrent & unpleasant I find the idea. There's nothing in this world that I find more despicable than child molesters & in today's society, I would personally bill those folks desiring this kind of stuff in with that crowd, but my opinion on the matter doesn't really matter. It's strictly an opinion of my own.
I grew up in a church culture that said it was a sin to even touch a drop of alcohol, yet it was the first debate I got into at bible college where I essentially got my *kitten* handed to me. Imagine that something described as a gift in scripture being a gift to be given to God. I've had to unlearn a lot of things that I was taught. I still hold that many of them are solid principles to be admired & often to be held too, but if I do so, I do so from a perspective of knowing the whole truth & not some man made ordinance for behavior. To this day, I rarely ever drink because it's my culture to not do so even though that idea was built on a fallacy that I was taught.
So what is the more dangerous precedent? Creating a morality based on a lie or admitting that truthfully things aren't as black & white as we would like them to be & also saying this is how it really is, but you shouldn't choose that path because it's a pretty eff'd up way to live that will cause a lot of problems for you. None of the earth shattering revelations that I have happened upon have altered my moral code in any significant way. I'm still old school, I still would point people in the direction that causes the least amount of strife, but I'm not going to say you should live this way because it's the only way you're allowed too. If someone's faith isn't sturdy enough to withstand uncomfortable truths, then I question the strength of that faith.
Honestly, I mean this in no disrespectful way, but you should get out more, maybe read a book or spend some time studying something outside your current scope of knowledge. You would be amazed at some of the things that most of us have misconceptions about.5 -
This content has been removed.
-
astral_baby wrote: »Renaissance_Turtle wrote: »Runner1393 wrote: »It doesn’t all come down to ego; sometimes it comes down to religion and ones belief system. I wouldn’t be in an open marriage bc my faith says it’s wrong and condemns it. Flirting isn’t harmless when you believe lusting is wrong. If one believes that the sole purpose of a marriage is to glorify their creator and be a representation of Christ’s love for the church, that cant in good conscience be defiled. For me it has nothing to do with ego, but what I believe is right and wrong. And everyone will believe differently. Xoxoxo
Here, let me rock your theological world for a moment....
Lord have mercy
Are you tryna flirt with me? Here, let me pm you my snapchat, kik & prepaid cell phone number that my wife doesn't know about...
We? Huh? The vast majority of Brits don't live by the Book, don't believe in it at all and are openly disdainful of it and anyone who believes in it. As illustrated perfectly by your post. Agnostics and Atheists are the mainstream. They stopped being the self styled renegades they imagine themselves to be decades ago, but someone forgot to tell them. Practicing Christians are very much the counter cultural minority at this point in all of Britain and Western Europe. U.S. isn't quite as bad but it's catching up.
Speaking of the times, "we" also live in a time where we can take a pill to cure gonorrhea and syphilis. Except when those pills stop working and we're already seeing that happen. All strains of human papilloma virus (HPV)and herpes simplex (HSV) I and II, are incurable. Once one is infected, (which can happen with no symptoms) that's it. And HPV and HSV I & II are incredibly rampant and growing so exponentially, the prediction is that in 50 years, the majority of people in Western societies will be infected.
The Book is old fashioned preventative wisdom that very much still applies today. No belief is required to take the timeless precautions it promotes. Many non-religious cultural and political conservatives abide by it's suggestions for reason of commons sense alone. I'm pretty sure in retrospect, no one regrets not taking a roll in the hay with someone they didn't know very well. The other way around, not so much.
I love this closing statement. You nail it perfectly.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Doesn’t intent matter?0
-
Renaissance_Turtle wrote: »Cutaway_Collar wrote: »Renaissance_Turtle:
Nothing to do with the Bible.
Even atheists adhere to monogamy and some sense of loyalty to spouses. It’s human nature. It is the norm in all countries in the world. Surely it is not based on a selective religious system. Humans are naturally inclined to take a life partner and live with them with some sense of commitment.
Your defence of polygamy citing the Bible sets a dangerous precedent. Deuteronomy says a lot of weird things and there is also a lot of underage marriages or unions in the OT. Would you defend child marriages in the same way?
Well, first lets get one thing strait. No where in my post did I defend polygamy. I actually said it was a stupid idea & even started off with the fact that it was not God's desire. It's just a permissible marital position. Stating a fact that something is permissible is not promotion. Promoting would be me coming in here saying that everyone needs a second or third spouse because the bible says so. Jumping to a straw man argument about child marriages isn't bolstering your argument as it has nothing to do with the topic at hand & does nothing but expose your ignorance of scripture to me.
Second, I'm going to guess that you've never been outside of a Westernized country or if so, then not for any length of time aside from a short vacation. Polygamy is a very common thing in many parts of the world. I'm guessing you don't personally know any missionaries serving in Africa, Asia or the Middle-East. I have friends in every part of the world, they have talked about stuff like this when they come home to raise support. One of them told me a story about a chief in one of the villages he travels too that had become a Christian & spent some time learning from him. A couple of months later the guy came to him distraught about divorcing & sending three of his wives away because he had inadvertently taught the man that he should only have one wife if he was going to be a leader. He had no idea the chief had four wifes when he was teaching him. He was distraught because he missed two of them & the children that he sent away with all three of them. There are a lot of cultures and groups of people even some here in the us that have wives or mistresses that aren't legally acknowledged because laws forbid it even where the culture does not. This is also another example of the church influencing legal statutes in places where they have little cultural influence.
If you don't believe it's common, maybe info from HRAF published in their Ethnographic Atlas will shed some light on it. Out of nearly 1250 unique cultures & societies in the world, less than 190 of them are strictly monogamous. Over a thousand of them have either frequent or occasional polygamy. You talk of atheists adhering monogamy, this because they are largely concentrated in Westernized societies where the legal & culture norm affect their personal moral code. It has nothing to do with their "human nature". Human nature is a fundamental disposition or trait it cannot be altered & is something endemic to all humans. Marriage is neither a disposition not a trait. It is a learned behavior based on the culture or multiple cultures from which a person observed & gathered influenced by as they matured & developed.
Oh, and for the record this country was built on the backs of many married "children" as well as married & single adults. Most of those child spouses were in the neighborhood of being 14-16 year old brides & grooms. It was a pretty common thing in our nation's history up until the last 100 years. I find this idea asinine just like I do polygamy, but I refuse to say something is unbiblical when I cannot back it up based on what I know of scripture regardless of how abhorrent & unpleasant I find the idea. There's nothing in this world that I find more despicable than child molesters & in today's society, I would personally bill those folks desiring this kind of stuff in with that crowd, but my opinion on the matter doesn't really matter. It's strictly an opinion of my own.
I grew up in a church culture that said it was a sin to even touch a drop of alcohol, yet it was the first debate I got into at bible college where I essentially got my *kitten* handed to me. Imagine that something described as a gift in scripture being a gift to be given to God. I've had to unlearn a lot of things that I was taught. I still hold that many of them are solid principles to be admired & often to be held too, but if I do so, I do so from a perspective of knowing the whole truth & not some man made ordinance for behavior. To this day, I rarely ever drink because it's my culture to not do so even though that idea was built on a fallacy that I was taught.
So what is the more dangerous precedent? Creating a morality based on a lie or admitting that truthfully things aren't as black & white as we would like them to be & also saying this is how it really is, but you shouldn't choose that path because it's a pretty eff'd up way to live that will cause a lot of problems for you. None of the earth shattering revelations that I have happened upon have altered my moral code in any significant way. I'm still old school, I still would point people in the direction that causes the least amount of strife, but I'm not going to say you should live this way because it's the only way you're allowed too. If someone's faith isn't sturdy enough to withstand uncomfortable truths, then I question the strength of that faith.
Honestly, I mean this in no disrespectful way, but you should get out more, maybe read a book or spend some time studying something outside your current scope of knowledge. You would be amazed at some of the things that most of us have misconceptions about.
Do you have an opinion on pop-tarts?0 -
jimmypalooza wrote: »Ok I know I'm not the only one here. I'm not here to cheat but just because I'm on a diet doesn't mean I can't still look at the menu! LoL Just check in and see who's looking!
Now WTF.... You look for a flirt at My Fitness Pal with "xxx" people looking forward to get skinny ASF!!!
Why dont you just download Tinder man!!!1 -
Renaissance_Turtle wrote: »Cutaway_Collar wrote: »Renaissance_Turtle:
Nothing to do with the Bible.
Even atheists adhere to monogamy and some sense of loyalty to spouses. It’s human nature. It is the norm in all countries in the world. Surely it is not based on a selective religious system. Humans are naturally inclined to take a life partner and live with them with some sense of commitment.
Your defence of polygamy citing the Bible sets a dangerous precedent. Deuteronomy says a lot of weird things and there is also a lot of underage marriages or unions in the OT. Would you defend child marriages in the same way?
Well, first lets get one thing strait. No where in my post did I defend polygamy. I actually said it was a stupid idea & even started off with the fact that it was not God's desire. It's just a permissible marital position. Stating a fact that something is permissible is not promotion. Promoting would be me coming in here saying that everyone needs a second or third spouse because the bible says so. Jumping to a straw man argument about child marriages isn't bolstering your argument as it has nothing to do with the topic at hand & does nothing but expose your ignorance of scripture to me.
Second, I'm going to guess that you've never been outside of a Westernized country or if so, then not for any length of time aside from a short vacation. Polygamy is a very common thing in many parts of the world. I'm guessing you don't personally know any missionaries serving in Africa, Asia or the Middle-East. I have friends in every part of the world, they have talked about stuff like this when they come home to raise support. One of them told me a story about a chief in one of the villages he travels too that had become a Christian & spent some time learning from him. A couple of months later the guy came to him distraught about divorcing & sending three of his wives away because he had inadvertently taught the man that he should only have one wife if he was going to be a leader. He had no idea the chief had four wifes when he was teaching him. He was distraught because he missed two of them & the children that he sent away with all three of them. There are a lot of cultures and groups of people even some here in the us that have wives or mistresses that aren't legally acknowledged because laws forbid it even where the culture does not. This is also another example of the church influencing legal statutes in places where they have little cultural influence.
If you don't believe it's common, maybe info from HRAF published in their Ethnographic Atlas will shed some light on it. Out of nearly 1250 unique cultures & societies in the world, less than 190 of them are strictly monogamous. Over a thousand of them have either frequent or occasional polygamy. You talk of atheists adhering monogamy, this because they are largely concentrated in Westernized societies where the legal & culture norm affect their personal moral code. It has nothing to do with their "human nature". Human nature is a fundamental disposition or trait it cannot be altered & is something endemic to all humans. Marriage is neither a disposition not a trait. It is a learned behavior based on the culture or multiple cultures from which a person observed & gathered influenced by as they matured & developed.
Oh, and for the record this country was built on the backs of many married "children" as well as married & single adults. Most of those child spouses were in the neighborhood of being 14-16 year old brides & grooms. It was a pretty common thing in our nation's history up until the last 100 years. I find this idea asinine just like I do polygamy, but I refuse to say something is unbiblical when I cannot back it up based on what I know of scripture regardless of how abhorrent & unpleasant I find the idea. There's nothing in this world that I find more despicable than child molesters & in today's society, I would personally bill those folks desiring this kind of stuff in with that crowd, but my opinion on the matter doesn't really matter. It's strictly an opinion of my own.
I grew up in a church culture that said it was a sin to even touch a drop of alcohol, yet it was the first debate I got into at bible college where I essentially got my *kitten* handed to me. Imagine that something described as a gift in scripture being a gift to be given to God. I've had to unlearn a lot of things that I was taught. I still hold that many of them are solid principles to be admired & often to be held too, but if I do so, I do so from a perspective of knowing the whole truth & not some man made ordinance for behavior. To this day, I rarely ever drink because it's my culture to not do so even though that idea was built on a fallacy that I was taught.
So what is the more dangerous precedent? Creating a morality based on a lie or admitting that truthfully things aren't as black & white as we would like them to be & also saying this is how it really is, but you shouldn't choose that path because it's a pretty eff'd up way to live that will cause a lot of problems for you. None of the earth shattering revelations that I have happened upon have altered my moral code in any significant way. I'm still old school, I still would point people in the direction that causes the least amount of strife, but I'm not going to say you should live this way because it's the only way you're allowed too. If someone's faith isn't sturdy enough to withstand uncomfortable truths, then I question the strength of that faith.
Honestly, I mean this in no disrespectful way, but you should get out more, maybe read a book or spend some time studying something outside your current scope of knowledge. You would be amazed at some of the things that most of us have misconceptions about.
Din ANYONE read this *kitten*?2 -
jimmypalooza wrote: »Ok I know I'm not the only one here. I'm not here to cheat but just because I'm on a diet doesn't mean I can't still look at the menu! LoL Just check in and see who's looking!
Now WTF.... You look for a flirt at My Fitness Pal with fat people looking forward to get skinny ASF!!!
Why dont you just download Tinder man!!!
lol what??? ummm sir I am pleasantly plump...my mom says I'm just big boned...
and are you fat trying to get fit??? why are you here...looking for a boy toy?3 -
This content has been removed.
-
jimmypalooza wrote: »Ok I know I'm not the only one here. I'm not here to cheat but just because I'm on a diet doesn't mean I can't still look at the menu! LoL Just check in and see who's looking!
Now WTF.... You look for a flirt at My Fitness Pal with fat people looking forward to get skinny ASF!!!
Why dont you just download Tinder man!!!
lol what??? ummm sir I am pleasantly plump...my mom says I'm just big boned...
and are you fat trying to get fit??? why are you here...looking for a boy toy?
Actually... i were fat in may.... sskinny asf in september.... bulking up to get fat again... so yes, im fat looking forward to diet again.
Big boned is just a lie... Your mum lied to you. Sry to tell you.
And sry to say im hetro... are you a trans? Its ok to me...
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions