arfink Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1353273644' post='2512440'] And how many men rationalize their pre-marital sex by thinking that since they are not going to marry a virgin they might as well not be virgins themselves? Maybe you need to take a deep breath, grow a thicker skin, and stop playing the "wounded victim" card. [/quote] Man to man, I can tell you right now: You're being a jerk. Time to stop. When a young woman asks you to stop you don't EVER tell her she needs to get thicker skin. You're a man. Stop it.
EmilyAnn Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1353273644' post='2512440']Maybe you need to take a deep breath, grow a thicker skin, and stop playing the "wounded victim" card. [/quote] Did you stop and think for a moment that maybe that comparison is actually hurtful? Did you stop to think that making that comparison is objectifying and denigrating. I am not "playing the wounded victim card". It is genuinely offensive.
Freedom Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1353275748' post='2512455'] And really, come on guys...if someone has premarital sex and goes to confession for it, who are we to hold that sin above their heads the rest of their life? [/quote] Once it's confessed, it's forgotten and we do our best not to do it again.
Norseman82 Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 (edited) [quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1353274938' post='2512448'] Excuse me, I did NOT use the term "used cars." I'd rather not compare a person to any object, car, bell, whatever, thank you very much. [/quote] My bad, I thought I saw someone else use the term. [quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1353274938' post='2512448'] Last time I checked, the Church doesn't assert that women are the ones responsible for morality in a relationship, nor that women are completely responsible for a man's sin. What you're saying here is no better than Adam pointing the finger at Eve, instead of taking responsibility for his own sin. [/quote] Then why doesn't Emily Ann take resposibility for her own sin instead of blaming others in the Church for pushing people away and making it so hard to come back like she was saying in post 55? [quote name='EmilyAnn' timestamp='1353191354' post='2511993'] For a long time I thought all those things. I felt I wasn't worthy of love. I thought I was damaged goods. I thought no-one could ever want me as anything more than a sexual object. And a big part of that was the attitude that comes from other Catholics, and I can see it here. Someone said to me once that I couldn't get married now. Another person compared people who have has pre-marital sex to "used cars". I knew they were wrong, but you have no idea how much that hurt. That attitude was more objectifying that anything else I have ever experienced. [b]And it was that attitude that made it that much harder to turn back.[/b] Yes, I have made mistakes. But how many of you are sinless? Why should I be judged based solely on one mistake of my past? We seem to accept the repentance of all except those who have had pre-marital sex. The messages that comes from Catholics does not encourage one to re-embrace a life of chastity. [b]It pushes people away[/b], which is shameful. [/quote] What's good for the males is good for the females as well. [quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1353274938' post='2512448'] Right, let's all write off her opinion because it makes us have to re-evaluate how we go about expressing ours. Have you stopped to wonder if maybe she sounds like she's playing a victim card to you because what you're saying actually IS hurtful? Maybe if we took two seconds to listen to what she's saying, more people who say the things you say would realize that focusing on virginity as an exclusive measure of worth is incredibly harmful and DOESN'T foster growth in virtue. The point is, if we put most of our focus on how wonderful virginity is, our message only resonates with people who haven't had sex before marriage. If we focus instead of chastity (or even spiritual virginity, as Nihil discussed earlier), it leaves the door open for those who have fallen in the past. Because the reality is, people who have had premarital sex are NOT less worthy of love, less worthy of honor, less worthy of dignity than those who have "saved" themselves. [/quote] And you know what? The lessening of the importance of virginity is a slap in the face to the efforts of those who have worked long and hard to save themselves. And as I stated before, I did not say that those who have not saved themselves are not worthy of love - just that there are some who don't view them as compatible. But there are plenty more who are compatible, so I don't see why all the whining. Edited November 18, 2012 by Norseman82
Mark of the Cross Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1353187755' post='2511968'] I'm still stuck on the idea of [i]virginity[/i] having the further meaning. Are we defining virginity as not having sexual intercourse? Or any sexual activity? I only ask because I have a hard time equating complete abstinence from all sexual activity and "everything but the deed." Because technically, "everything but the deed" doesn't violate the "sacred garden" the way von Hildebrand describes it. So yeah. Maybe my issue is that virginity is so arbitrarily defined today, that I think it's more helpful to focus on chastity. And that Virginity works as a helpful descriptor in Mary's case because she was perfectly chaste, perfectly pure and uniquely devoted to God. But to me it seems to be less helpful when talking about people who aren't Mary. [/quote] Jesus said that if you look at a person with lust you have committed adultery. Pretty well all of us have done that at some time except for Knight of Christ. The gist I'm getting from people that virginity is not as important as ones overall moral attitude seems to be the right one. BTW I don't have sufficient props for the honesty and openness from many on this thread and the many wise posts. I salute you!
homeschoolmom Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='homeschoolmom' timestamp='1353062423' post='2511184'] Having moderated here for years, I can say with confidence-- it will be. [/quote]
arfink Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1353276272' post='2512463'] And you know what? The lessening of the importance of virginity is a slap in the face to the efforts of those who have worked long and hard to save themselves. [/quote] That's nice. It's also a strawman argument. Nobody is saying that here. You on the other hand are offering a lovely slap in the face for those who aren't virgins. I don't care how valuable virginity is, you don't treat your fellow human beings that way, especially the ones who have repented.
EmilyAnn Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1353276272' post='2512463'] Then why doesn't Emily Ann take resposibility for her own sin instead of blaming others in the Church for pushing people away and making it so hard to come back like she was saying in post 55? [/quote] Who said I haven't taken responsibility for it? Who are you to judge me? I am no worse a sinner than you. People who have had pre-marital sex get judging and condemnation. That is hardly the attitude we should take. It's a disgraceful lack of compassion. [quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1353276272' post='2512463'] What's good for the males is good for the females as well. [/quote] I don't get your point. Just because I am a woman does not make what I am saying gender-specific.
Norseman82 Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1353181993' post='2511917'] No, it's not, because Virginity isn't a magical token. Focusing on some physical state of being reduces a person to that state of being, and ignores virtue. Furthermore, we don't have any real definition of what a virgin is anymore, so that state of being has become virtually worthless. There IS no real definition of virginity, so how can we use that as the measure of what we give our spouse? Chastity, on the other hand, is something we can offer our spouse, and is what our future spouses are supposed to get. Although I think the idea of "purity" can be problematic too, I think it's a better descriptive of the ideal, of what we're supposed to offer our spouse. Purity denotes a single-mindedness, a complete and full dedication to your spouse (or to God). Virginity is a physical state of being, Purity deals with your will, and Chastity is virtue. Purity, I think, might work better in your "something I'm supposed to get" argument, but even then it's problematic because people are flawed, are prone to temptation and sin, and it's not fair. Plus, think about it this way: What if we did consider virginity some magic token meant for you, from your future spouse? So what happens when you meet your future spouse, and find that they've made a mistake and give your special token to someone else? I would feel hurt and resentful. I might even wonder what the point of saving my magic token for my spouse was, if I wasn't going to get one in return. I'd wonder if I should break up with my future spouse, because they haven't been as faithful to our future marriage covenant as I have. But how does this mindset foster forgiveness? How does it promote the virtue of chastity? If we instead looked at the issue from the position that chastity is what we give our spouse, it puts both people on an even playing field. It doesn't really matter what each has done in the past, although "saving oneself" for one's future spouse is a beautiful expression of chastity. It also means that both spouses will continue to grow in chastity, and in love for one another. Furthermore, focusing on virginity instead of chastity casts sex in a negative light. Sex in a marriage is a beautiful expression of the couple's marriage vows - which is why we go so far as to call it the marital act. Chastity preserves sex in its rightful place, as an ultimate expression of love and fidelity. Sex is an expression of chastity. With the virginity mindset, sex is just something that you're not supposed to do until you're married. The Blessed Virgin Mary is the perfect example. Mary was completely and totally devoted to God in all things, body, mind, will, spirit - everything. Thus, the descriptor "virgin" is most aptly applied to her, because she was absolutely purely devoted to God. How many of us Christians can say the same thing about our devotion to our spouses, or future spouses? We can't. TLDR: Spouses don't "get" anything. They're called to fidelity and love and chastity. Virginity is just an incidental result of practicing chastity, but losing one's virginity (whatever that actually means) [i]doesn't [/i]mean that one [i]can't[/i] become more chaste in the future, or even that one wasn't chaste (in the case of sexual assault). It's not helpful to think of virginity first, if we're talking about the lives of Christians. [/quote] Are you implying that it is not God's plan that two people should save themselves for each other? It may not be a "magical" token, but it certainly is something that God has indicated should be given by spouses to each other.
the171 Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 Can we close this thread? People are really being hurt.
Norseman82 Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='arfink' timestamp='1353276809' post='2512472'] That's nice. It's also a strawman argument. Nobody is saying that here. You on the other hand are offering a lovely slap in the face for those who aren't virgins. I don't care how valuable virginity is, you don't treat your fellow human beings that way, especially the ones who have repented. [/quote] If they truly repented, would they be whining and playing the victim card?
arfink Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1353277057' post='2512479'] If they truly repented, would they be whining and playing the victim card? [/quote] You keep saying that phrase, but you clearly don't get it. Everyone around you keeps telling you that your words are hurting people, and you just ignore it. You're going to have to come to grips with the fact that you can and do hurt other people with what you say, regardless of whether what you say is true or not. You have no right to continue being aggressive in this way, regardless of the supposed "repentance" of these people here. Just stop.
the171 Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1353277057' post='2512479'] If they truly repented, would they be whining and playing the victim card? [/quote] She isn't whining. She, along with most of the women of phatmass, feel objectified with the way you speak of virginity. Mary Magdalene Mary of Egypt Augustine Care for me to go on?
Basilisa Marie Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1353276272' post='2512463'] What's good for the males is good for the females as well. [/quote] This makes me angry. It makes me angry because it implies that women are the same as men, which isn't true. If it doesn't imply that women are the same as men, it implies that men's needs dominate women's needs. If it doesn't imply that men's needs dominate women's needs, then it means that the reverse (what's good for women is also good for men) is true. And I'd bet half my prop allowance that you wouldn't agree that what's good for women is also good for men. [quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1353276272' post='2512463'] And you know what? The lessening of the importance of virginity is a slap in the face to the efforts of those who have worked long and hard to save themselves. And as I stated before, I did not say that those who have not saved themselves are not worthy of love - just that there are some who don't view them as compatible. But there are plenty more who are compatible, so I don't see why all the whining. [/quote] I'm someone who has worked long and hard to save myself for marriage, and I don't find it a slap in the face. I have enough self-confidence to realize that I don't need the Church constantly giving me a pat on the back for my good decisions, when there are so many people out there who need Her love and guidance. It's not whining. Whinging would be complaining that other people don't congratulate you enough of a job well done, and that other people don't do enough to protect you from sin, or that people who express hurt and offense at what you say just need to get over themselves.
LaPetiteSoeur Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 (edited) Who the hell are we to judge others based on whether or not they are virgins? We know for a fact that St Augustine was not a virgin and had sex outside of marriage--he even had a son! He later went to confession, repented, and ya know, became the guy we know St Augustine to be. We are not God. People who have had sex before marriage are not "damaged goods." No one is damaged goods. Good Lord, if we don't believe that God can forgive all sins, and that he loves us unconditionally and that he'll take us back, then what is the point of hoping for salvation? Edited November 18, 2012 by LaPetiteSoeur
the171 Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 We use the story of our past to show what glorious things God can do with sinners.
Norseman82 Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='arfink' timestamp='1353277203' post='2512480'] You keep saying that phrase, but you clearly don't get it. Everyone around you keeps telling you that your words are hurting people, and you just ignore it. You're going to have to come to grips with the fact that you can and do hurt other people with what you say, regardless of whether what you say is true or not. You have no right to continue being aggressive in this way, regardless of the supposed "repentance" of these people here. Just stop. [/quote] I stand by what I say.
Basilisa Marie Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1353276940' post='2512475'] Are you implying that it is not God's plan that two people should save themselves for each other? It may not be a "magical" token, but it certainly is something that God has indicated should be given by spouses to each other. [/quote] Nope, there's no "someTHING" there, other than the two people. You give of your whole self to another person, and that person gives their whole self to you. Your whole self is still there, even if you had sex with someone else and went to confession for it. Obviously it's best to not have premarital sex. But what are we supposed to tell people who have realized their mistakes, and want desperately to turn away from sin and be faithful to the Gospel? Don't we have faith in the sacraments? Who among us has not sinned?
LaPetiteSoeur Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1353277443' post='2512486'] Nope, there's no "someTHING" there, other than the two people. You give of your whole self to another person, and that person gives their whole self to you. Your whole self is still there, even if you had sex with someone else and went to confession for it. Obviously it's best to not have premarital sex. But what are we supposed to tell people who have realized their mistakes, and want desperately to turn away from sin and be faithful to the Gospel? Don't we have faith in the sacraments? Who among us has not sinned? [/quote] I'm reminded of the phrase "He who has not sinned cast the first stone." I totally agree that while it's not best to have premarital sex, we do get to turn around and be faithful.
arfink Posted November 18, 2012 Posted November 18, 2012 [quote name='Norseman82' timestamp='1353277417' post='2512485'] I stand by what I say. [/quote] [img]http://i.qkme.me/3q4xnv.jpg[/img]
Recommended Posts