Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > Spirituality & Polyamory

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 01-04-2010, 04:24 PM
GroundedSpirit GroundedSpirit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New England USA
Posts: 1,231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jasminegld View Post
Grounded Spirit, when I first began to wrestle with reconciling the will of God with my interest in polyamory, the last thing I needed was someone disparaging my church ("first and foremost a political organization"; "their own agenda to pursue"). And there's a reason for that.
Hi Jasmine,

Well, I'm sorry if that hit a tender spot with you. All I can offer - and this is something I constantly remind myself of and try to stay connected to - is this.
Whenever I find myself in/leaning towards a defensive posture over anything short of a physical threat, I immediately try to identify what belief it is I hold that seems threatened and try to analyze what it would mean if that belief turned out to be a false - or maybe incomplete - one. (we have lots of them) This way I find I learn more and the communication becomes clearer with the assumed threaten-er.
I would chose not to debate any of your beliefs with you but acknowledge that you have the freedom to believe as you feel best as long as it harms none.
That's really all I have to offer.

GS
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01-04-2010, 04:48 PM
GroundedSpirit GroundedSpirit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New England USA
Posts: 1,231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lovefromgirl View Post
The site has a very problematic section on adult/child sexuality; at one point, it is testified that a thirteen-year-old enjoyed his abuse.
This has always been a really difficult topic for us in general. Having raised 5 children ourselves, the necessity of being on guard for predators or others of bad intent was a prevailing reality.
But we also acknowledge the other side of reality - because we've been there too. We know when "we" became aware of our own sexuality (and yes it was prior to age 13 !) and began experimenting with it. We also know numerous others personally and have had these in-depth conversations on the topic.
I haven't read the article you speak of but have read hundreds of others - or books etc - dealing with the topic and can only say that we've come to the conclusion there's considerable damage currently being done to innocent people by the "moralists" in positions of power & influence and if allowed to go unchecked it will simply add to the distorted views too many people have about our natural sexuality in general.
It's not a small problem.
There's currently hundreds (maybe thousands?) of young men & women that have been charged with "crimes" based on an arbitrary age limit for sexual exploration and will now be faced with being labeled "predators" - dangers to society for the rest of their lives !
In a maybe slightly more extreme example I recall reading about not long ago, a young woman of 16 who was involved in a little orgy that included others of a variety of ages (up to mid 40s). Somehow the cat got out of the bag as it often does and her parents got wind of it and filed charges against all involved.
When it came court time the young lady stormed into the courtroom and declared to all that there was no coercion of ANY manner involved - that if anything it was largely HER idea and how can you DARE prosecute these friends !
Never-the-less, the prosecution did proceed and the supposed perpetrators convicted, sentenced and labeled.
This was especially poignant for us as we had certainly both been involved in very similar activities at similar ages and have nothing but fond memories. We also know numerous others who will testify to the same.
So unfortunately, at least to us, this like so many other things is one of those grey areas that needs to be looked at on a case by case basis. Blind morality leads to blind justice.

GS
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 01-07-2010, 08:12 PM
jasminegld jasminegld is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GroundedSpirit View Post
Hi Jasmine,
Well, I'm sorry if that hit a tender spot with you.
I was concerned about Duane, and still am. I haven't seen Duane post again. Duane asked about polyamory being "out of the will of God." Your reply was about the validity of religious organizations. I am concerned about Duane's reaction, based on what I remember of my own experience.

Quote:
Whenever I find myself in/leaning towards a defensive posture over anything short of a physical threat, I immediately try to identify what belief it is I hold that seems threatened and try to analyze what it would mean if that belief turned out to be a false - or maybe incomplete - one.
It takes practice to get to that place, and very few of us can start there right off the bat. The more conservative the starting place, the more difficult it is allow one's beliefs to be challenged. We have to take them in small steps, one carefully chosen bit at a time, as we are ready for them. Duane had already chosen the area he wanted to work on -- the will of God. It's not up to us to challenge him with other areas that he hasn't indicated he is ready for.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 01-08-2010, 04:45 PM
GroundedSpirit GroundedSpirit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New England USA
Posts: 1,231
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ravenesque View Post
[COLOR="RoyalBlue"][FONT="Comic Sans MS"][B]

I see your point. There is a broadness to your statement which does not seem directed at any one organization.
Hi Raven,

Well yes, a statement like that (as you mentioned) has to be broad because it's so fundamental to humans and especially "groups" of them.
This I think kind of takes you down a path of understanding the difference between "spirituality" and "religion".
There's something in all of us that "knows" we're all connected, all part of something bigger than us. Sensing this, we reach out to try to find, to understand,what that all is. It's in our nature. We need to understand our world around us. The disadvantages of a big brain.
Although at the root of all the worlds great "religions" there are some simple, basic truths espoused by some enlightened individuals that attempt to lead people to discover that connectedness, those simple truths are often twisted by the too-big brains attached to beings with an equal desire for power & control. And that's when things go awry and "religions" surface under the guise of "bringing people together for better understanding". It seems that the true "understanding" necessary is a very personal and individual thing that can only come through states of high awareness and much exposure to all the variations that such simple truths can allude to.
Love and compassion seem to fall into that category

GS
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-17-2012, 10:02 PM
nihonjindesu nihonjindesu is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 8
Default

Wow, I am so glad for this link.

That's an awesome website with lots of good ideas about things I haven't even considered before. I come from a Christian background so it's very interesting to see where I was mis-taught the Bible, etc.
(I no longer identify as Christian though.)
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-18-2012, 06:46 AM
bassman bassman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Surrey UK
Posts: 317
Default

Thanks for the link.
Though I'm atheist and dont find credibilty at all in the bible, for me it is myth and legend, - I am going to send this link to my conservative other, in the hope that something will resonate with her.
__________________
Male M, struggling noob.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 04-06-2013, 06:50 PM
loveboston's Avatar
loveboston loveboston is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: California
Posts: 52
Default Love

What’s always interesting to me is that it would appear that of all the things Jesus told us to truly fear it was sex.

Jesus was never asked a direct question about sex outside of marriage.

He was asked a direct question about divorce. It was a trick question to see if Jesus would contradict Hebrew traditions and customs.

His response to the question about divorce was that it was permissible only in a case of sexual immorality.

In later translations of the words of Christ the word immoral is replaced with the word fornication. This is an important distinction but it doesn’t change the impact of what Jesus said.

Sexual immorality is socially unacceptable sexual behavior. Fornication is sex between two unmarried people.

The translators who wrote the King James version of Christ’s words using the word fornication wanted to make it clear that to them sex outside of marriage was unacceptable in 1607 English society.

There is no doubt that in the present day evangelical church it is immoral or socially unacceptable for two people who aren’t married to have sex.

There is also no doubt that many people who believe Jesus is God and try to obey His commandments are not a part of the evangelical church.

Are there universally accepted standards of sexual immorality that have never changed by individuals who obey Christ’s command that we love each other as much as we love ourselves?

My list looks like this.
• Rape
• Deceit
• Betrayal
• Abandonment

In fact Jesus said our greatest enemy is materialism.

Treating each other as possessions is materialism at its worst.

From my experience, a question every couple whoever they are deals with on a regular basis.

Last edited by loveboston; 04-06-2013 at 06:54 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 12-27-2013, 01:16 AM
Anomalous44 Anomalous44 is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3
Default Cross topics, Polyamory vs. Polygamy

I came here to read about some Christian views on polyamory and found a lot of people using the term polygamy in this thread. It's a pet peeve of mine when people do this. They are two different words with two different meanings. Maybe they are simple spellchecker errors in this thread, however, I hadn't seen a moderator point this out and thought I would. I have nothing against either poligamists or polyamorist, I just think it's confusing for those who are new to either concept if the terms are intermingled. Now, I am A Christian who believes that God speaks to me through the Holy Ghost that rose up with me when I laid down my sinful body in baptism. I belief that this spirit creates a God consciousness within me that helps me to interpret Gods word both written and spoken. I believe that if God gave me a heart that is capable of abundant love for multiple people then I should let that love flow. Many non-believers study scripture much deeper than many of the hypocritical "blind" believers, and they base their non-belief on the blatant contridictions they find in both scripture and interpretations of scripture. Christians themselves have hundreds of sects and denominations based on their inability to agree on specific details. I say, believe and trust God with your heart and mind, seek truth through text and spoken word. But, let the Holy spirit reveal those truths for you in your heart and then share your experience without judgementally trying to make others conform to your truth, let them find their own, through their loving and trusting relationship with God.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 12-27-2013, 01:43 AM
Emm's Avatar
Emm Emm is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 769
Default

Polygamy, while illegal in just about any jurisdiction you care to name, is not—in its literal definition—incompatible with Polyamory. In any case, I did a word search and don't see how one instance of the word "polygamist" and three of "polygamy" (including the two in your post) constitutes "a lot of people using the term".
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 12-27-2013, 10:46 AM
Anomalous44 Anomalous44 is offline
New Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3
Default

Although my statement implied many, which was a bit over zealous on my part, the actual required number of persons constituting the use of the term "lot" or " a lot" would be two or more. However, I believe that it only requires one use of the term poligamy or poligamist in a thread about polyamory, to be sufficient to point out that there is a difference. I'm not judging just pointing out something that could mislead others who are less informed.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
christianity, faith, information, polyamory, reconciliation

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:04 AM.