Nudism

[Archivist]

I regret making that statement. Because there are things that people have done which have been against the law and later became legalized later. (and were not immoral)

HOWEVER, I think comparing the examples you two have given with nudism is comparing apples and oranges.

Michelle

Michelle,

I glad that you admit that your ststement was wrong because you can't say that breaking the law is sinning. Too many heroic people have challenged unjust laws and their behavior was in no way sinful.

Neither Buzz nor I were comparing Rosa Parks or saving Jews to nudity. Those were simply offered as examples to show how wrong your statement was.

 

[Archivist]

So you really are drawing a parallel between genocide and nudity laws?

Ok....

*Ahem* What I saw in the response to your assertion about genocide or Rosa Parks was that Miss Shelby called you on the lack of corrolation between the "unjustness" of laws supporting genocide and laws concerning nudity. Perhaps you would like to elaborate then on what the correlation is, and how a law against nudity, well nigh universal in civilized nations, somehow violates your human or civil rights, since you seem to take this aspect of your argument more seriously than at first I presumed.

Shane,

You obviously are not paying attention to what is being written. Neither Buzz nor I in any way compared what Rosa Parks or the people who saved the Jews did to nudity. We offered those examples to challange a statement that "what IS illegal and done anyway is sinful."

Too many people throughout history have rightly challanged unjust laws. That statement essentially said that all those individuals who did so were sinning by breaking those unjust laws. Buzz and I raised those examples to show clear cases where breaking the law was not a sin.

If you have a problem with this please go back and reread the posts. This portion of the discussion has not=hing to do with nudity--we are talking about people standing up for what is right.

 

[Shane Roach]

Some further clarification on nakedness and God's attitude towards it.

Leviticus chaters 18 and 20, lists of various people one is not to uncover.

Exodus 20:26. One should not even so much as accidentally expose ones covered nakedness on the steps to an altar.

Exodus 28:42. An undergarment so that their nakedness is not exposed even accidentally in the temple.

 

[Shane Roach]

Shane,

You obviously are not paying attention to what is being written. Neither Buzz nor I in any way compared what Rosa Parks or the people who saved the Jews did to nudity. We offered those examples to challange a statement that "what IS illegal and done anyway is sinful."

Too many people throughout history have rightly challanged unjust laws. That statement essentially said that all those individuals who did so were sinning by breaking those unjust laws. Buzz and I raised those examples to show clear cases where breaking the law was not a sin.

If you have a problem with this please go back and reread the posts. This portion of the discussion has not=hing to do with nudity--we are talking about people standing up for what is right.

I know exactly what you think you're doing, but as I have pointed out, your examples do not fit the bill. Yes, in fact people have stood up against unjust laws. So now, show how the laws forbidding nudity are unjust. Jesus Himself was crucified for saying things about authority, in a manner of speaking. Nevertheless, we are to honor authority as Christians. That's the underlying context of the objection that Miss Shelly brought up. So, if you honestly think Rosa Parks and genocide are relevant to this issue, run with it. Otherwise understand that it is correct to point out that we as Christians are to avoid even so much as the appearance of wrongdoing.

If you need a scripture reference for that as well, I will provide it. Understand though, I am not ignorant of what you are trying to do. It is not I, but you, who have missed the point here, or else one might perhaps argue that neither of us is much interested in the other person's point. MY point is your examples are not applicable to the case being discussed as the laws concerning nudity are in no way unjust or in some way suspect.

 

[Archivist]

I know exactly what you think you're doing, but as I have pointed out, your examples do not fit the bill. Yes, in fact people have stood up against unjust laws. So now, show how the laws forbidding nudity are unjust. Jesus Himself was crucified for saying things about authority, in a manner of speaking. Nevertheless, we are to honor authority as Christians. That's the underlying context of the objection that Miss Shelly brought up. So, if you honestly think Rosa Parks and genocide are relevant to this issue, run with it. Otherwise understand that it is correct to point out that we as Christians are to avoid even so much as the appearance of wrongdoing.

If you need a scripture reference for that as well, I will provide it. Understand though, I am not ignorant of what you are trying to do. It is not I, but you, who have missed the point here, or else one might perhaps argue that neither of us is much interested in the other person's point. MY point is your examples are not applicable to the case being discussed as the laws concerning nudity are in no way unjust or in some way suspect.

I don't appreciate being told that I have some underhanded reason for posting. I raised the issue of Rosa Parks because I disagreed with a statement that was made equating breaking the law with sin. IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH NUDITY. Why do you have such difficulty accepting this???

 

[Shane Roach]

I don't appreciate being told that I have some underhanded reason for posting. I raised the issue of Rosa Parks because I disagreed with a statement that was made equating breaking the law with sin. IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH NUDITY. Why do you have such difficulty accepting this???

I think it has to do with your assumption that anyone was ever under any doubts that unjust laws are an entirely different matter. Bringing up Rosa Parks and the genocide of the Jews in this context was, believe me, every bit as dumbfounding to me as my pressing you for the relevance of those issues appears to be to you. It was like a slap in the face to have racism and murder wiggled under my nose in relation to my understanding of culture and scripture about nudity.

I hope you will forgive my dogged persuit of the issue. If you want to drop that aspect of it, I am all for that.

Any thoughts on the scriptures I posted then?

 

[The Bellman]

No, our society is not at fault, and no, nudity and sex are connected by the simple fact that exposure of the genitals is required for sex to take place. "Many civilizations" is something of a loose term. Obviously, looking around, most don't.

Yes, our society is at fault, but that, of course, is a personal opinion. It is however fact that our society has set its rules regarding acceptable nudity. They aren't set in stone, or "natural" - they're simply what our society accepts. Around the world, those rules vary widely. In many societies on some social occasions (such as mixed bathing) nudity is quite frequent. In others nudity on beaches is accepted and unremarked (check out much of Europe sometime. Even in Australia women regularly go topless on beaches, and nobody thinks twice about it).

Nudity and sex aren't connected, except by societal decree. In the west, we equate sex with nudity because that is what our society has brought us up to do.

Sorry, but the fact that the genitals need exposure for sex to occur has nothing to do with it. If it did, a thong (g-string) would be acceptable dress (since it covers the genitals) - but it's not.

There are a lot of wife swapping clubs all around the world too. I thought we were talking here about whether something was sinful or not.

The fact that there are a lot of wife swapping clubs around is completely irrelevant.

 

[Shane Roach]

Nudity and sex aren't connected, except by societal decree. In the west, we equate sex with nudity because that is what our society has brought us up to do.

Sorry, but the fact that the genitals need exposure for sex to occur has nothing to do with it. If it did, a thong (g-string) would be acceptable dress (since it covers the genitals) - but it's not.

If you had anything more than the most vague examples of all the supposed societies that fit into your argument, it would carry more weight.

Nudity and sex are inseperably linked in all but the barest minority of situations. Those situations really only serve to proove the axiom that every rule has its exceptions.

Personally, I am somewhat comforted that you choose to argue this path. I think it makes the issue quite plain that you take such an untennable position on such flimsy evidence. I have taken design courses where the relevance of which direction a culture reads dictates to a large extent where they will place an amorphous object on a dark background to imply "floating". If they read right to left, the "floating" object appears on the left - if left to right, the opposite. How much more so then, when every single time anyone has sex they must first remove their clothing, does the removal of clothing imply sex?

You will no doubt continue to disagree, but I am lost as to where you will find any support for your claims outside of simple repetition.

 

[FadingWhispers3]

Quick question if I may: is exposure of the breast/chest (not the rest of the body mind you) also inseparably linked with sex?

 

[aggie03]

Does it stand logically that if I tell you how to treat slaves, there will be slave-owning involved?

Yes. When the instructions were written on how a master ought to treat his slaves, there was slave-owning involved. That is a logical conclusion.

Yet few Christians today would cite the biblical verses about how to treat their slaves as evidence that god wants us to own slaves.

Can you cite the verse that you're thinking of for me? I would really appreciate that I would just like to see specifically what you are referring to.

 

[Richard]

Another question: At what point are we nude?

Transparent clothes = nudity?

A loin cloth?

An itsy-bitsy teeny-weeny yellow polka dot bikini?

I'm reminded of a joke that's a tad risque but should be clean enough for this discussion (apologies if it isn't):

A mother tells her daughter on her wedding day, "Always preserve some mystery in your marriage. Never let your husband see you entirely undressed."

The daughter marries and goes on her honeymoon. When the couple comes back, the son-in-law takes the mother aside and asks if there's any insanity in their family.

Startled, the mother says no and asks why.

"Because your daughter never takes off her hat!"

funny funny story ... lol , but in another sense of nudity ... I would say anything that leads to lust is definitally nudity ... so it just depends really ... but then theres alot more than I know...lol so don't attack me ..haha

 

[The Bellman]

If you had anything more than the most vague examples of all the supposed societies that fit into your argument, it would carry more weight.

Nudity and sex are inseperably linked in all but the barest minority of situations. Those situations really only serve to proove the axiom that every rule has its exceptions.

Personally, I am somewhat comforted that you choose to argue this path. I think it makes the issue quite plain that you take such an untennable position on such flimsy evidence. I have taken design courses where the relevance of which direction a culture reads dictates to a large extent where they will place an amorphous object on a dark background to imply "floating". If they read right to left, the "floating" object appears on the left - if left to right, the opposite. How much more so then, when every single time anyone has sex they must first remove their clothing, does the removal of clothing imply sex?

You will no doubt continue to disagree, but I am lost as to where you will find any support for your claims outside of simple repetition.

I've rarely seen a more wilfully blind post in my life. Congratulations. You get my "Head in the sand" award for the week.

If you are not aware - or just don't want to know - that many cultures throughout history and today have VERY different standards as regards public nudity to the US, then that's your problem. It appears you are one of those people who think that what he is used to in terms of culture is "god-ordained" and doesn't want to even investigate the possibility that other cultures might be very different, because that might show that there's nothing special about his culture's rules. Sorry you feel that way.

I won't waste your time further but will, instead, discuss the issue with people who are actually capable of looking beyond their own front doorstep.

 

[Shane Roach]

I've rarely seen a more wilfully blind post in my life. Congratulations. You get my "Head in the sand" award for the week.

If you are not aware - or just don't want to know - that many cultures throughout history and today have VERY different standards as regards public nudity to the US, then that's your problem. It appears you are one of those people who think that what he is used to in terms of culture is "god-ordained" and doesn't want to even investigate the possibility that other cultures might be very different, because that might show that there's nothing special about his culture's rules. Sorry you feel that way.

I won't waste your time further but will, instead, discuss the issue with people who are actually capable of looking beyond their own front doorstep.

I've been to Europe. Most their beaches are topless, not nude. The nude ones, much like here in Austin, are largely peopled with the alternative lifestyle crowd. Hardly anyone walks around anywhere in public in Europe fully nude, and you know it.

Shall I bring up what the common understanding of porn is all over the world? Is it a mystery why Playboy has naked women in it as opposed to ones with clothes on, or Penthouse, or Gallery?

I'm sorry but you're merely refusing to face the obvious.

 

[aggie03]

I recently made a post, I don't know if you've seen it...just wanted to let you know It's on the other page.

 

[Shane Roach]

Quick question if I may: is exposure of the breast/chest (not the rest of the body mind you) also inseparably linked with sex?

Not so much to my mind, no. But you're pushing the envelope if you think there's ever going to be a day when you can show up to work at Taco Bell topless, you know?

I don't object to a little playfull pondering over the connotations of clothing and its various uses or lack thereof. It is the pretens that there is somehow some dark, secret western Judeo-Christian OBSESSION with sex that grates on my last nerve. Look at China. Look at the Middle East. Heck. look almost everywhere at any time in history. It's just a wild and desperate argument to make.

 

[The Bellman]

I've been to Europe. Most their beaches are topless, not nude. The nude ones, much like here in Austin, are largely peopled with the alternative lifestyle crowd. Hardly anyone walks around anywhere in public in Europe fully nude, and you know it.

Shall I bring up what the common understanding of porn is all over the world? Is it a mystery why Playboy has naked women in it as opposed to ones with clothes on, or Penthouse, or Gallery?

I'm sorry but you're merely refusing to face the obvious.

Shall I bring up the cultures that bathe, nude, in mixed company? Shall I bring up the Cote D'Azur? Shall I bring up the innumerable "primitive" cultures which have/had very different nudity taboos to western society? Shall I bring up the older cultures which regularly played sport in the nude?

I'm sorry but you're merely refusing to face the obvious.

 

[The Bellman]

Not so much to my mind, no. But you're pushing the envelope if you think there's ever going to be a day when you can show up to work at Taco Bell topless, you know?

I don't object to a little playfull pondering over the connotations of clothing and its various uses or lack thereof. It is the pretens that there is somehow some dark, secret western Judeo-Christian OBSESSION with sex that grates on my last nerve. Look at China. Look at the Middle East. Heck. look almost everywhere at any time in history. It's just a wild and desperate argument to make.

There IS a dark western Judeo-Christian OBSESSION with sex. It's not terribly secret, however. Just look at the debates on these pages...how many of them are concerned with sex and sexual matters? Christianity - actually, monotheistic religion - has long had an obsession with sex.

 

[Shane Roach]

Shall I bring up the cultures that bathe, nude, in mixed company? Shall I bring up the Cote D'Azur? Shall I bring up the innumerable "primitive" cultures which have/had very different nudity taboos to western society? Shall I bring up the older cultures which regularly played sport in the nude?

I'm sorry but you're merely refusing to face the obvious.

You probably just did, but we are all more or less familiar with them and how they are the exception rather than the rule, as I mentioned earlier.

 

[Shane Roach]

There IS a dark western Judeo-Christian OBSESSION with sex. It's not terribly secret, however. Just look at the debates on these pages...how many of them are concerned with sex and sexual matters? Christianity - actually, monotheistic religion - has long had an obsession with sex.

That's why Greeks treated women the way they did, because female nudity had nothing to do with sex in that culture. I see now.

 

[The Bellman]

You probably just did, but we are all more or less familiar with them and how they are the exception rather than the rule, as I mentioned earlier.

lol riiiiiight...want some more sand?