Topless Danes

[Nadiine]

Why must it be assumed that describing them as "cow udders" is lowering it? Everything God made is beautiful, is it not?

Oh please. My boobs are not equivalent to animal udders. This is ludicrous to try to support.
Are you likened to a pig or monkey or baboon?

I'm a bigger animal lover than probly anyone on this forum - having been involved in animal rights for years.
It's an insult to liken female breasts to cow udders - or any part of an animal's anatomy.

Ya'awl can try to backpeddle on what it says and means, I don't care.
I see plenty behind these replies, they reveal a whole lot.

 

[The Lady Kate]

The question is, is it the CHRISTIAN culture doing it? Or the nonChristian?
Of course we can't expect the lost to act modest or moral or obey God's laws... Christians however are not to be in the same category of morality.

So don't do it. Where's the problem?

We have given scripture to this effect and to show that it's not ok to follow cultures just becuz they decide something is ok.
Do we claim Amsterdam is fine in prostitution & street drugs?

Clearly "we" do not.... while I'm no fan of prostitution, it should be noted that the main drugs legal in Amsterdam (pot and hash) are of God's original design.

We don't decide what's moral becuz a culture deems it so, we go by God's principles & laws. I keep seeing this mentality go on and it's disheartening to me that Christians are so apathetic to public nudity.

Perhaps it's because nudity is not in and of itself sinful... although it can lead to sinful acts (then again, just about anything can lead to a sinful act, can't it?)

The temptation of nudity, IMHO, is in the forbidden nature of it... we all know the most appealing part of the forbidden fruit isn't the taste, but the fact that it is forbidden. Take that out of the equation, and...

Biblically breasts ARE sexual and the majority of men ARE stimulated visually by them.

Not just Biblically, is it?

And again, we're ignoring the fact that it isn't ONLY "danish" men who see them that way - & what of little kids who see them like that who do have those sexual feelings?

What about them? Going to "save" the children by putting burquas on all the women?

What of my husband in Thailand who had women take their tops off at the hotel pool? How is this moral conduct, let alone Godly?

If your husband got overly sexually aroused by this, I would suggest that it's not those women who have the problem.

Perehaps you shouldn't be letting him go to Thailand... Have you considered putting him on a shorter leash?

And could you please provide scripture to support this instead of your opinions alone? Until I see more biblical support, just saying "modesty is relative" is not supportive of toplessness - if so, then complete nudity has to be modest as well - and anything else anyone one else deems moral.

Adam and Eve got along just fine with complete nudity.

 

[LJSGM]

Clearly "we" do not.... while I'm no fan of prostitution, it should be noted that the main drugs legal in Amsterdam (pot and hash) are of God's original design.

Yeah, I'm not sure he designed it to be smoked... or eaten for that matter. Drugs kill brain cells... which is the reason for brain abnormalities that it produces. Hardly something beneficial when using it, and I couldn't say that it's a gift from God like you could. You must not have seen anyone's life destroyed by drugs I guess.

Perhaps it's because nudity is not in and of itself sinful... although it can lead to sinful acts (then again, just about anything can lead to a sinful act, can't it?)

Lets keep our privates "private" why don't we

The temptation of nudity, IMHO, is in the forbidden nature of it... we all know the most appealing part of the forbidden fruit isn't the taste, but the fact that it is forbidden. Take that out of the equation, and...

Men will still lust.

What about them? Going to "save" the children by putting burquas on all the women?

My objection is more along the line of you keeping your boobies to yourself. I don't want to see them, and I should have the freedom not to.

If your husband got overly sexually aroused by this, I would suggest that it's not those women who have the problem.

Yeah, and if your husband didn't get aroused by seeing other women's privates, there might be something wrong with your husband.

Perehaps you shouldn't be letting him go to Thailand... Have you considered putting him on a shorter leash?

Well, I'll certainly have to put mine on a shorter leash when I go to Thailand

Adam and Eve got along just fine with complete nudity.

Please put your clothes back on

 

[Nadiine]

So don't do it. Where's the problem?

Is this you just playing 'devils advocate' or are you really behind your post point this time?

Every time I see your posts you're going in the liberal direction against conservative posts - last time I saw you, you said you were just saying what the arguments were against it, not that you were in agreement with those arguments you raised.
YOu seem to show the same pattern here.
And here we are yet again.

Clearly "we" do not.... while I'm no fan of prostitution, it should be noted that the main drugs legal in Amsterdam (pot and hash) are of God's original design.

FOOD is also God's design, abuse of it is NOT - as I can list many things that are abused that are natural and neutral in and of themselves.
Do I smoke or eat poison too? That's natural.

Perhaps it's because nudity is not in and of itself sinful... although it can lead to sinful acts (then again, just about anything can lead to a sinful act, can't it?)

Sex isn't evil either... sex outside God's boundaries IS.
Nudity in public in front of other males is wrong. If it isn't, perhaps you should try it?

Not just Biblically, is it?

Nope not just biblically - it's a well known fact that the majority of men view them as a sexual object and are sexually aroused by them.

What about them? Going to "save" the children by putting burquas on all the women?

huh? going topless and running to the opposite extreme as if to say I'm promoting burqa's instead is just putting words in my mouth and sarcastic.

This is too common in debate, if you want to counter a position, just go to the most obnoxious opposite extreme and think it creates a valid argument in your favor.

If your husband got overly sexually aroused by this, I would suggest that it's not those women who have the problem.

That's a rude comment and extremly suggestive and I find it offensive. So I won't waste time answering.

Perehaps you shouldn't be letting him go to Thailand... Have you considered putting him on a shorter leash?

no more than some people need to be put on shorter leashes when they can't help but attack others personally instead of simply debating an issue.

Adam and Eve got along just fine with complete nudity.

YA, TILL GOD CLOTHED THEM.

 

[The Lady Kate]

Yeah, I'm not sure he designed it to be smoked... or eaten for that matter. Drugs kill brain cells... which is the reason for brain abnormalities that it produces. Hardly something beneficial when using it, and I couldn't say that it's a gift from God like you could. You must not have seen anyone's life destroyed by drugs I guess.

Oh, but I have seen it. And as far as killing brain cells goes, let's not forget the most notorious culprit... alcohol.

Refresh my memory... did Jesus turn the wine into water, or was it the other way around?

Lets keep our privates "private" why don't we

You may keep whatever "private" you choose... I shall do the same.

Men will still lust.

Water shall still be wet... the sky shall still be blue... men shall continue to lust after anything with a heartbeat... and for some sick individuals, the heartbeat is optional.

My objection is more along the line of you keeping your boobies to yourself. I don't want to see them, and I should have the freedom not to.

I have similar objections when I go to the beach... too many men wearing Speedos who honestly should not be wearing Speedos. Too much time on the boardwalk; not enough time on the exercise bike.

Alas, in this politically correct culture of ours, we forget that nobody has the right to not be offended... although you needn't worry about me, since I don't plan of sunbathing in Denmark any time soon... even though I do hate tan lines...

Yeah, and if your husband didn't get aroused by seeing other women's privates, there might be something wrong with your husband.

I would hope my husband didn't make a point to stop and stare.

Well, I'll certainly have to put mine on a shorter leash when I go to Thailand

I'd try talking to him first... communication is important in any relationship.

Please put your clothes back on

I'm wearing clothes... please put your glasses on.

 

[LJSGM]

Oh, but I have seen it. And as far as killing brain cells goes, let's not forget the most notorious culprit... alcohol.

Never understood why anyone drinks that stuff...

Water shall still be wet... the sky shall still be blue... men shall continue to lust after anything with a heartbeat... and for some sick individuals, the heartbeat is optional.

Yes, there is a thin line between a natural bodily reaction and "lust."

I have similar objections when I go to the beach... too many men wearing Speedos who honestly should not be wearing Speedos. Too much time on the boardwalk; not enough time on the exercise bike.

hehe,

It's the same with smoking... just don't do it around me!

Alas, in this politically correct culture of ours, we forget that nobody has the right to not be offended... although you needn't worry about me, since I don't plan of sunbathing in Denmark any time soon... even though I do hate tan lines...

and I hate tans....

I would hope my husband didn't make a point to stop and stare.

We all hope that, don't we... It's like their brains shut down or something I think.

I'd try talking to him first... communication is important in any relationship.

A little joke on my part.

I'm wearing clothes... please put your glasses on.

Ok, just don't take them off while I'm around!

 

[The Lady Kate]

Is this you just playing 'devils advocate' or are you really behind your post point this time?

Every time I see your posts you're going in the liberal direction against conservative posts - last time I saw you, you said you were just saying what the arguments were against it, not that you were in agreement with those arguments you raised.
YOu seem to show the same pattern here.
And here we are yet again.

So... that's no answer to the question of "where's the problem?"

God gave us His Word. he also gave each of us a brain so that we may determine for ourselves how best to implement His Word in our own lives. Where's the problem?

FOOD is also God's design, abuse of it is NOT - as I can list many things that are abused that are natural and neutral in and of themselves.
Do I smoke or eat poison too? That's natural.

I'm not sure... do you smoke cigarettes? Nicotine is a lot more toxic than a hash brownie.

Sex isn't evil either... sex outside God's boundaries IS.
Nudity in public in front of other males is wrong. If it isn't, perhaps you should try it?

What makes you think I haven't?

Just kidding... but shouldn't that be my choice, and not your demand?

Nope not just biblically - it's a well known fact that the majority of men view them as a sexual object and are sexually aroused by them.

History hasn't been kind to us ladies, has it?

huh? going topless and running to the opposite extreme as if to say I'm promoting burqa's instead is just putting words in my mouth and sarcastic.

And trying to convince... who, exactly? That this is about "saving children" is a tired old canard if ever there was one.

This is too common in debate, if you want to counter a position, just go to the most obnoxious opposite extreme and think it creates a valid argument in your favor.

I am curious as to how far you're willing to take modesty. Consider...

In 1907, this was considered shocking swimming attire... almost her entire arms are bare!

And yet, the male population of the world managed to curb their lusts and make it acceptable.

That's a rude comment and extremly suggestive and I find it offensive. So I won't waste time answering.

You wasted far more time telling me how much time you'd waste answering.

no more than some people need to be put on shorter leashes when they can't help but attack others personally instead of simply debating an issue.

You made your personal life an issue in this debate. Keep yourself on a shorter leash in the future if you don't want it in play.

YA, TILL GOD CLOTHED THEM.

And why did He do that?

 

[Nadiine]

So... that's no answer to the question of "where's the problem?"

No... it's called confusion when your post style as stated by you previously in that nudity in art thread, you said you take a devil's advocate approach.
After reading you here, I had to wonder what you were actually doing
ergo the comment.

God gave us His Word. he also gave each of us a brain so that we may determine for ourselves how best to implement His Word in our own lives. Where's the problem?

I see, so it's as it was in the days of the book of the Judges? "so every man did as he thought was right in his own eyes".
As if God has no moral standard for His creation? We all mope around blind in the dark, following the way we feel and the way we want to live?

No, the bible gives us God's standards - we either adhere to those are we reject them to go our own way.
And I'll let God sort out how He'll judge all that.

I'm not sure... do you smoke cigarettes? Nicotine is a lot more toxic than a hash brownie.

Last I checked, cigarettes don't impair your brain function or cause hallucinations??? The issue about street drugs that Amsterdam legalizes is that they affect and alter the mind; causing people to things they would usually not do without taking the substance.
But no I don't smoke.

What makes you think I haven't?

Just kidding... but shouldn't that be my choice, and not your demand?

No, becuz I don't want to have to SEE your naked self when I'm out and about - and I don't want kids or people who will be in any way affected to have to see it either.

And trying to convince... who, exactly? That this is about "saving children" is a tired old canard if ever there was one.

SAVING? It's called protection. It's a duty of any adult to protect our youth.. maybe you don't feel that way and want to spin this to "saving".

We're responsible for what we expose kids to - if you hadn't noticed, there's a generation or 2 right now that has been exposed to extreme violence and sex and I think the stats today show the result of that.

(reap & sow?)

I am curious as to how far you're willing to take modesty. Consider...

In 1907, this was considered shocking swimming attire... almost her entire arms are bare!

And yet, the male population of the world managed to curb their lusts and make it acceptable.

That isn't what this is about, it isn't which outfits are appropriate, IT'S THAT 1/2 NAKED IS NOT MODEST.

You wasted far more time telling me how much time you'd waste answering.

The attack was uncalled for and rude. I'm not laughing at the quirpy comments that follow either.
And due to your abusive statements I won't legitimately discuss the issue further with you. THAT would be the waste of time here.

You made your personal life an issue in this debate. Keep yourself on a shorter leash in the future if you don't want it in play.

NO, I did not. I made the point that my husband was innocently at a hotel in another country visiting his daughter when that was imposed upon him.

YOU TAKING IT TO PERSONAL SLAMS AS IF HE BELONGS ON A SHORTER LEASH or shouldn't travel is uncalled for, and I did NOT open it up for you to take cheap, hostile shots with the minimal information I gave on it (on purpose)

THAT is ad hom. and uncalled for and when people resort to that, the spirit is showing.

 

[LJSGM]

Last I checked, cigarettes don't impair your brain function or cause hallucinations??? The issue about street drugs that Amsterdam legalizes is that they affect and alter the mind; causing people to things they would usually not do without taking the substance.
But no I don't smoke.

I think smoking should be outlawed too.

 

[Tissue]

Oh please. My boobs are not equivalent to animal udders. This is ludicrous to try to support.
Are you likened to a pig or monkey or baboon?

I'm a bigger animal lover than probly anyone on this forum - having been involved in animal rights for years.
It's an insult to liken female breasts to cow udders - or any part of an animal's anatomy.

Ya'awl can try to backpeddle on what it says and means, I don't care.
I see plenty behind these replies, they reveal a whole lot.

This is a very typical Nadiine response. Instead of actually dealing with my post, you throw a few muddy lobs at my argument (upheld by no argument or reason whatsoever), then go on to restate your opinion. How about dealing with my post with maturity and respect?

 

[Admiral Kirk]

Sick...Satan clearly inspired that movement...

 

[The Lady Kate]

No... it's called confusion when your post style as stated by you previously in that nudity in art thread, you said you take a devil's advocate approach.
After reading you here, I had to wonder what you were actually doing
ergo the comment.

Ergo, still no answer.

I see, so it's as it was in the days of the book of the Judges? "so every man did as he thought was right in his own eyes".
As if God has no moral standard for His creation? We all mope around blind in the dark, following the way we feel and the way we want to live?

As if God's moral standard is the same now as it was in the Book of Judges? We had both best pray not... I'd say that as Christians, we've fallen far off that wagon.

No, the bible gives us God's standards - we either adhere to those are we reject them to go our own way.
And I'll let God sort out how He'll judge all that.

Please do... I'll accept God's judgement over that of many of my bretheren.

Last I checked, cigarettes don't impair your brain function or cause hallucinations??? The issue about street drugs that Amsterdam legalizes is that they affect and alter the mind; causing people to things they would usually not do without taking the substance.
But no I don't smoke.

Cigarettes don't impair brain function? Clearly you've never seen anyone trying to kick the habit.

And how about the street drugs legal in America which affect and alter the mind; causing people to do things that they usually do not do?

The most dangerous drug you'll ever find in an Amsterdam hash bar is in the beer.

No, becuz I don't want to have to SEE your naked self when I'm out and about - and I don't want kids or people who will be in any way affected to have to see it either.

So what?

The world's full of people I don't want to have to SEE at all... with or without clothing.

Alas, until Jesus' return, the world will not be a fair place.

SAVING? It's called protection. It's a duty of any adult to protect our youth.. maybe you don't feel that way and want to spin this to "saving".

We're responsible for what we expose kids to - if you hadn't noticed, there's a generation or 2 right now that has been exposed to extreme violence and sex and I think the stats today show the result of that.

I think if you look beyond the stats, I think you'll find the correlation not as strong as you'd prefer.

Perhaps I shouldn't have done that figure modeling back in college... but AFAIK, none of those art students turned into a serial rapist.

That isn't what this is about, it isn't which outfits are appropriate, IT'S THAT 1/2 NAKED IS NOT MODEST.

It's exactly what this is about...100 years ago, 1/100TH NAKED WAS NOT MODEST. BUT THE TIMES, THEY ARE A-CHANGIN'

(See... I can type in all caps too... doesn't make me any more correct either.)

The attack was uncalled for and rude. I'm not laughing at the quirpy comments that follow either.
And due to your abusive statements I won't legitimately discuss the issue further with you. THAT would be the waste of time here.

You're certainly going through a lot trouble to tell me that you're not going to go through the trouble to tell me anything...

NO, I did not. I made the point that my husband was innocently at a hotel in another country visiting his daughter when that was imposed upon him.

And yet, I have no doubt, he remains a faithful husband and well-adjustred human being. Was he as appalled and outraged at this as you seem to be?

YOU TAKING IT TO PERSONAL SLAMS AS IF HE BELONGS ON A SHORTER LEASH or shouldn't travel is uncalled for, and I did NOT open it up for you to take cheap, hostile shots with the minimal information I gave on it (on purpose)

You could've avoided this altogether by providing no information on it (on purpose).

I apologize for the flippant nature of my comment, but if you don't want something tossed about in this discussion (and we both know these things don't always get tossed gently) then do not bring it up.

THAT is ad hom. and uncalled for and when people resort to that, the spirit is showing.

Very well... I apologize. Now, let's move on.

 

[Nadiine]

Ergo, still no answer.

? Not sure what more I can add to what I already had - so nevermind

As if God's moral standard is the same now as it was in the Book of Judges? We had both best pray not... I'd say that as Christians, we've fallen far off that wagon.

Yes it is the same moral standard. Show me which moral laws of God have changed - it's all reiterated into the NT. PLUS, we have the Holy Spirit within us providing inner conviction and leading.

Yes, people who claim to be Christians have fallen far off the wagon. So many are so busy being transformed to this world, that they don't bother to seek His will - or change what they're doing when they read His word.

Please do... I'll accept God's judgement over that of many of my bretheren.

After reading some of your replies, perhaps it's possible that some of the 'judgment' you recieve may actually be warrented - might want to do some analysis on that.
And esp. when you haven't stood in front of God yet to know what His judgment actually will be.
I'd think being more concerned about people's judgment is more along the lines of worrying what others think than what God thinks & has potential to get us into spiritual trouble.

Cigarettes don't impair brain function? Clearly you've never seen anyone trying to kick the habit.

No they don't -- no more than caffeine withdrawl, or sugar withdrawl... but I've never seen people lose control of their car & get into accidents or lose all their inhibitions becuz they didn't have a cigarette or bag of Skittles, have you?

And how about the street drugs legal in America which affect and alter the mind; causing people to do things that they usually do not do?

Wrong is wrong whether it's legal or not that's my point. Drugs make women go topless too LOL (ie. Girl's Gone Wild )

The most dangerous drug you'll ever find in an Amsterdam hash bar is in the beer.

really? that's not what our friends said when they returned from their trip to Europe & stayed there for a few days.

The world's full of people I don't want to have to SEE at all... with or without clothing.
Alas, until Jesus' return, the world will not be a fair place.

In other words, "the world isn't fair, so............ TAKE YOUR TOPS OFF GIRLS"??? What else can we do just becuz things aren't fair? I'm sure God won't mind.

Perhaps I shouldn't have done that figure modeling back in college... but AFAIK, none of those art students turned into a serial rapist.

rofl, so here we are at the NEXT extreme... we've moved from Burqa's to rape now. AHAHHA oh this is rich.
So, since people don't turn into rapists becuz of seeing woimen nude, we can conclude that God's ok with female nudity in public.
Gosh, why did God even bother to have a Bible written when I can just ask you what His standards are due to societal statistics?

It's exactly what this is about...100 years ago, 1/100TH NAKED WAS NOT MODEST. BUT THE TIMES, THEY ARE A-CHANGIN'

(See... I can type in all caps too... doesn't make me any more correct either.)

I cap for emphasis - deal with it. Times change, that's why we have the problems we have today too. Times change, but not always for the good.
They've changed to include legalized mass abortion too - does that make that change ok?
Modesty is not 1/2 nude. No matter how you try to push it.

You're certainly going through a lot trouble to tell me that you're not going to go through the trouble to tell me anything...

You still don't get it, so let's just skip it now. Once you have to try a 3rd time to explain what your statement meant, it usually doesn't get thru anyways.

And yet, I have no doubt, he remains a faithful husband and well-adjustred human being. Was he as appalled and outraged at this as you seem to be?

As I said, I'm not discussing that with you due to your ad hom attacks.

You could've avoided this altogether by providing no information on it (on purpose).

No, I should have added that information, it provided further details about the flaws in the opposing arguments for toplessness. It proves that the women who take their tops off do not KNOW who their audiences are and since that's so, they don't know who's fantacizing or lusting or being led to sexual thoughts by seeing their bodies.
(becuz God has hardwired men visually - we know that as a fact).

I apologize for the flippant nature of my comment, but if you don't want something tossed about in this discussion (and we both know these things don't always get tossed gently) then do not bring it up.

In other words, it's legitimate that you lob personal insults & attacks at anyone who adds personal experience in debate
Try some self control instead! Ad hom is NOT ok - and adding personal information (namely general info) is NOT license to open fire on others.

--
all that aside, I'm STILL waiting for anyone to provide me with all the prominant Christian leaders & teachers who promote female nudity in public.
Which upstanding Christian theologians, apologists, Pastors, teachers, evangelists give women this guideline of going 1/2 naked in public?

 

[The Lady Kate]

Yes it is the same moral standard. Show me which moral laws of God have changed - it's all reiterated into the NT. PLUS, we have the Holy Spirit within us providing inner conviction and leading.

Yes, people who claim to be Christians have fallen far off the wagon. So many are so busy being transformed to this world, that they don't bother to seek His will - or change what they're doing when they read His word.

How fortunate that we have you to show us the way... assuming you know it any better than the rest of us.

After reading some of your replies, perhaps it's possible that some of the 'judgment' you recieve may actually be warrented - might want to do some analysis on that.
And esp. when you haven't stood in front of God yet to know what His judgment actually will be.

I have no fears of that... I've found God to be far more forgiving than man in cases such as this.

I'd think being more concerned about people's judgment is more along the lines of worrying what others think than what God thinks & has potential to get us into spiritual trouble.

Which is exactly why your own veiled threat of my "warranted judgement" means nothing to me.

See? We can agree on some things.

No they don't -- no more than caffeine withdrawl, or sugar withdrawl... but I've never seen people lose control of their car & get into accidents or lose all their inhibitions becuz they didn't have a cigarette or bag of Skittles, have you?

As a matter of fact, I have... I've even seen violence ensue.

Nicotine is a powerful drug, and withdrawl can be an ordeal... why do you feel the need to cheapen it?

Wrong is wrong whether it's legal or not that's my point. Drugs make women go topless too LOL (ie. Girl's Gone Wild )

I'm assuming that you're making the point that the drug making the GGW women go topless is alcohol. Yet even Jesus consumed alcohol... responsibly.

And that's the key: Very few things in this world are inherently good or evil.... it is how they are used that makes them good or evil.

If we can both agree that alcohol addiction is one of the most destrcutive things a person can go through, and yet an occasional glass of wine is harmless, then why can't the same thing be said about marijuana?

Agan, we agree... wrong is wrong (and right is right) regardless of whether something is illegal or not. So what makes wine acceptable and pot unacceptable besides legality?

really? that's not what our friends said when they returned from their trip to Europe & stayed there for a few days.

So... what did they say? Or is this another case where you don't want to get too personal?

In other words, "the world isn't fair, so............ TAKE YOUR TOPS OFF GIRLS"??? What else can we do just becuz things aren't fair? I'm sure God won't mind.

Did I say that? I do wish you'd limit your responses to things I actually say... and what I'm saying is... the world does not care a single fig over what you personally do or do not wish to see. Get over it.

rofl, so here we are at the NEXT extreme... we've moved from Burqa's to rape now. AHAHHA oh this is rich.
So, since people don't turn into rapists becuz of seeing woimen nude, we can conclude that God's ok with female nudity in public.

Can we conclude that? Again, I wish you'd respond to things I actually say... otherwise this conversation is going to be equal parts confusing and pointless.

Gosh, why did God even bother to have a Bible written when I can just ask you what His standards are due to societal statistics?

Does make you wonder, doesn't it?

I cap for emphasis - deal with it.

You were trying to substitute emphasis in place of an actual point. It doesn't work that way - deal with it.

Times change, that's why we have the problems we have today too. Times change, but not always for the good.

We have the problems we have today... the good news is, we don't have all the problems we had yesterday. Times don't always change for the good... that's something else we have to deal with.

They've changed to include legalized mass abortion too - does that make that change ok?

"Mass abortion"? I'm not familiar with that term. Last I heard, women who chose to have abortions chose to have them one at a time... has that changed?

(Off-topic, while I am against abortion, I am grateful for the fact that the decision not to have one is in my own hands... and not the hands of some bumbling bureaucrat trying to pander for my vote... aren't you?)

Modesty is not 1/2 nude. No matter how you try to push it.

I'm not pushing anything... modesty is 1/100th nude, apparantly... but it wasn't back in 1907.

Some change is good.

You still don't get it, so let's just skip it now. Once you have to try a 3rd time to explain what your statement meant, it usually doesn't get thru anyways.

Again, we agree. Perhaps you'll appreciate the irony later tonight... sometimes these things need time to sink in.

No, I should have added that information, it provided further details about the flaws in the opposing arguments for toplessness. It proves that the women who take their tops off do not KNOW who their audiences are and since that's so, they don't know who's fantacizing or lusting or being led to sexual thoughts by seeing their bodies.

So is the solution to make sure men don't see their bodies? Careful... we're quickly heading back to the burquas again.

(becuz God has hardwired men visually - we know that as a fact).

I don't think God would appreciate your blaming it on Him... but I won't presume to speak for Him on this

In other words, it's legitimate that you lob personal insults & attacks at anyone who adds personal experience in debate
Try some self control instead! Ad hom is NOT ok - and adding personal information (namely general info) is NOT license to open fire on others.

Hmmm... apology not accepted, then?

--
all that aside, I'm STILL waiting for anyone to provide me with all the prominant Christian leaders & teachers who promote female nudity in public.
Which upstanding Christian theologians, apologists, Pastors, teachers, evangelists give women this guideline of going 1/2 naked in public?

You may have a long wait... But weren't you saying something before about not caring what the world thinks? Why then should the opinions of these mere mortals matter?

 

[Tissue]

all that aside, I'm STILL waiting for anyone to provide me with all the prominant Christian leaders & teachers who promote female nudity in public.
Which upstanding Christian theologians, apologists, Pastors, teachers, evangelists give women this guideline of going 1/2 naked in public?

Who actually cares? Think for yourself.

I know of at least one pastor who proclaims that, according to the Bible, it is a sin for a man to urinate sitting down. Just because no pastor takes a stand on this one way or another does not mean you're right. This isn't some pre-school playground, where I get Billy on my side and you have Bubba and Julie on your side.

 

[*Starlight*]

I don't see anything wrong with allowing women to be topless. I think anyone should be allowed to wear whatever they want, even if it's nothing at all. Human body is something natural.

 

[The Lady Kate]

I don't see anything wrong with allowing women to be topless. I think anyone should be allowed to wear whatever they want, even if it's nothing at all. Human body is something natural.

As for allowing women to be topless, it would depend on the context, wouldn't it? I don't see many of my Christian bretheren picking the nudes at the local art museum... if the human body, crafted in God's own image, cannot be displayed in any way,shape, or form, then it is inherently sinful... and nothing of God is inherently sinful.

 

[Angel4Truth]

God didnt cover them up for no reason.

 

[LightHorseman]

God didnt cover them up for no reason.

Which is why God miraculously makes breasts invisible to anyone but a Christian married husband *rolls eyes*

 

[Angel4Truth]

The Spirit of God dwelling in a woman who contains it does exactly that - keeps them covered except for her husband and he apreciates having them just for him as well.