I've encountered straight people who have an "open marriage" or who are polyamourous or something. What a sham. There is no point in marrying if you are only going to commit adultery. It isn't even a real commitment since one or both parties take on other lovers on a regular basis.
In days like these, "marriage" seems to be whatever you want it to be. It really makes me sad.
Not only that, but that they can't change. This is the crux of the issue. If we are told we are fine the way we are in whatever sins we struggle with because these people don't believe sin is real or what have you (yes, I know people - friends even - who do not believe there is such thing as sin), then the deception of the evil one has won, and the person is vulnerable because they are then living and immersed in their sins without knowing it is not what we are called to do in this life. Hope that makes sense. This is what I've been seeing about this issue in the OP - the whole topic. I do believe that through Christ God, anybody can change their lives.
The difference is one therapist telling you it is completely "normal" to behave in such manner and the opposite is to tell you is NOT and you should try to live a happy life based on what truly makes one happy. And how can anyone be happy away from God? *sigh* Pretty much it is like telling someone compulsive that it is ok to be washing their hands 100 times a day...Maybe I am off to say this but that is what I get from this as I admit I am no expert...
I've encountered straight people who have an "open marriage" or who are polyamourous or something. What a sham. There is no point in marrying if you are only going to commit adultery. It isn't even a real commitment since one or both parties take on other lovers on a regular basis.
In days like these, "marriage" seems to be whatever you want it to be. It really makes me sad.
I can call myself a car (and during drinking perhaps I have) but does that make me a car? No. Some things are objectively real and others are not. Marriage is an objective reality, it is a Sacrament, and just because someone labels something as Marriage, does not make it so.
What? I'll have to read it. Thanks for posting.Homosexuality - News - Times Topics - The New York Times
Forgot to post this^ here it goes...Enjoy! The homosexuals will now "set the norms" for marriageWhat a bout that ??
Inclusive Orthodoxy ~ The Rev. Justin R. Cannon
has anyone read this one?^ just curious of what they dish out as EO while it is a bunch of ...crap
One thought that may be difficult for younger folk to grasp - these people deliberately introduce language changes to ease the promotion of their godless 'way of life'.
I strongly advise people to become aware of this, to see it for the manipulation it is, and to reject it. Just ask when the word was coined and then think like an Orthodox Christian. If it ain't hundreds of years old, you ought to be suspicious.
For example, "polyamory". The word is little more than ten years old, yet now everyone, under the influence of our manipulative media, is repeating that euphemism which makes polygamy "OK". It's as if everyone forgot that the correct word is "polygamy". The same thing goes for "heterosexual" and much of the modern language dealing with these ideas. To paraphrase G.K.Chesterton, I prefer the coarse language of our forefathers, which at least held the ideas behind the words in their rightful place.
One thought that may be difficult for younger folk to grasp - these people deliberately introduce language changes to ease the promotion of their godless 'way of life'.
I strongly advise people to become aware of this, to see it for the manipulation it is, and to reject it. Just ask when the word was coined and then think like an Orthodox Christian. If it ain't hundreds of years old, you ought to be suspicious.
For example, "polyamory". The word is little more than ten years old, yet now everyone, under the influence of our manipulative media, is repeating that euphemism which makes polygamy "OK". It's as if everyone forgot that the correct word is "polygamy". The same thing goes for "heterosexual" and much of the modern language dealing with these ideas. To paraphrase G.K.Chesterton, I prefer the coarse language of our forefathers, which at least held the ideas behind the words in their rightful place.
Hahaha I'm always suspicious of anything that seems new. That's just how I roll.
I know exactly what you're talking about. I see it all the time as a college student.
I've seen the shifting languages from global warming to climate change to climate chaos and now climate disruption (whatever that is).
Job applications no longer have "race" but they ask for your "diversity." What is your diversity?
The most disturbing thing of it all is that these people have so much power and influence that they make us think we are in the minority. Yet, we are not.
Yeah, what is wrong with the words "man" and woman"??? It's all "male" and "female" as in "the male/female was walking down the road." I find it so annoying!
Because, apparently, there is no such thing as men and women. They are social constructs designed to keep women oppressed.
I kid you not. The differences between men and women are alleged to be simply social constructs.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?