Evidence for God from Science

puritan lad wrote:I have a 13 year old who keeps asking why she can't get body piercings. My answer is that it would too painful for her when I yank out her jewelry.

hehehe That's a good one.

Jac3510 wrote:

FFC wrote:

Birdie wrote:I don't think I dress too bad (I'm a teenage girl). The 'worst' things I wear are short skirts, and because they very comfty and cool when its hot. I'm not big on makeup. I usally don't have acne and my lips are red already and I think eyeliner looks weird. It would be good if you're older to wear eyeliner and you have bags under your eyes but wearing it when your young makes you look emo.

emo?

Here ya go:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEJDGLF-e18



edit: here's actually a good video on what emo really is. You have to watch it all the way until the end, though . . . it's a mockumentary that gets serious as 4:20:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LSRreO6T64

Goodness! Thanks Jac. I thought it was a bird.

puritan lad wrote:What women wore in the 1920's would have given the puritans of the 1700's heart failure. What they wear now would have gotten them arrested in the 1920's. Have we gone too far?

Yes, we certainly have. I was watching one of the nightly talk shows (I think it was Dateline, but I'm not positive), and the host asked, "With the clothes women wear today, what is left for the prostitutes to wear?"



Ok, I have another question for the men.

Do you find long hair or short hair more attractive on women?

Angel Cake wrote:

puritan lad wrote:What women wore in the 1920's would have given the puritans of the 1700's heart failure. What they wear now would have gotten them arrested in the 1920's. Have we gone too far?

Yes, we certainly have. I was watching one of the nightly talk shows (I think it was Dateline, but I'm not positive), and the host asked, "With the clothes women wear today, what is left for the prostitutes to wear?"



Ok, I have another question for the men.

Do you find long hair or short hair more attractive on women?

It really depends on the woman. You have to take into consideration their facial structure, height, weight, etc. Actually, my preference is shorter hair, but not too short, but once again that depends on the woman.

FFC wrote:

Angel Cake wrote:

puritan lad wrote:What women wore in the 1920's would have given the puritans of the 1700's heart failure. What they wear now would have gotten them arrested in the 1920's. Have we gone too far?

Yes, we certainly have. I was watching one of the nightly talk shows (I think it was Dateline, but I'm not positive), and the host asked, "With the clothes women wear today, what is left for the prostitutes to wear?"



Ok, I have another question for the men.

Do you find long hair or short hair more attractive on women?

It really depends on the woman. You have to take into consideration their facial structure, height, weight, etc. Actually, my preference is shorter hair, but not too short, but once again that depends on the woman.

I agree that it depends on the woman. I generally prefer long hair, but sometimes shorter hair can be fine too.

FFC wrote: Goodness! Thanks Jac. I thought it was a bird.

Thats Emu. Kind of like a smaller version of an ostrich.

Australia's leading Muslim cleric, Taj Din al-Hilali, recently delivered a Ramadan sermon that compared women to meat and suggested they must be covered up and locked away for their own protection.

He was talking about women who dressed "immodestly" and said words to the effect that if meat was left outside in the yard uncovered, then the animals will devour it. He asked rhetorically who was at fault, and answered for everyone - not the animals, but the meat.

Back in early December last year a gang of Lebanese Muslims sexually assaulted a woman sunbathing on a beach near Sydney. She was not Muslim and was wearing swim attire within the custom and fashion for many young Australian women. This incident began the Cronulla Beach riots. The young Muslim men regarded the woman as morally loose due to her lack of clothing despite it being appropriate dress for the dominant culture, the situation and the climate.

Moderate Muslims doing their best to integrate into mainstream Australia were aghast to hear their purported spiritual leader, Taj Din al-Hilali, put their faith in such an embarrassing light. And ordinary Australians were disgusted to hear that any cleric would stand up before his congregation and offer up views and advice so dehumanising to women and men alike. However, Sheik Hilali's world view in which women are property and men sexually incontinent beasts liable to commit a capital crime at the slightest glimpse of flesh is also a world view that is at home with the worst of the radical clerics of the Middle East. Muslim women are to cover up so as not to be regarded as prostitutes and invite sexual assault. It is considered their responsibility to prevent such assaults, and should they fall victim to male lust, then it is regarded as obvious that they deserved it in some way. Indeed, rape victims in Islamic countries are often murdered by their own families for the shame they have brought to the family, or condemned to death by hanging under Shariah Law.

Some questions:

~ Do women have any responsibility as regards their state of dress when it comes to sexual assault or other unwanted attentions?

~ Should women be more aware of the possibility that their dress may have some effect on some males and perhaps be more considerate of them?

~ Are there any situations or circumstances where Christian women should take care in matters of dress so as not to attract (or distract) men by their appearance (eg. in church) ?

Thrice yea, Judah!

When it comes to hair, I agree with FFC.

Turgonian wrote:Thrice yea, Judah!

Care to elaborate, Turgy?

There has been a lot of effort expended by various groups to have men take responsibility for their own reactions towards women, rather than to blame women with responses like "she was asking for it" and "she had it coming to her" and so forth.

Of course. Men are (or should be) rational beings capable of restraining themselves. Both men and women are responsible. 'She was asking for it' is no excuse and wishful thinking as well. No one asks to be assaulted.

I guess you don't belong in Taj Din al-Hilali's fold, then.

Although there has been quite some outrage expressed in Australia about this man's attitude, he has also had a great many supporters among his "congregation" - devout young Muslim men who quite agree with him. That is very troubling.

Oh, the Muslim society has moved to diffuse the situation by removing him from the scene, sending him on 3 months sabbatical to Mecca to give him some time to "rethink" ??? his point of view.
Er-hmm.

He has apologized for the fact that people were upset by his views, and said since that he was really only referring to prostitutes... which makes it seem that he thinks they deserve to be attacked.

Father Felice, an Italian priest, has put up a sign at the entrance to the church in Cinisello Balsamo, Milan. The sign reads: “God knew what your navel looked like before you were born, so there is no need to expose it in church.” Father Felice is reported to have said that he put up the sign because his parish cannot afford to hire guards to keep out low-cut jeans and high-cut tops. It would seem that young ladies with bare midriffs are not very welcome.
Source

How much do clothes matter, and to whom?

Judah wrote:How much do clothes matter, and to whom?

After the Fall, God clothed Adam and Eve. Over and over again in the OT, nakedness is shameful. In the NT women are called to be modest. Clearly, clothes matter to God, or He would not have had the authors of the Scriptures discuss those topics.

How much??

Well, consider this. We are not supposed to cause our brother to stumble, yet many Christian women wear very skimpy clothing around their Christian brothers. Men are visually stimulated. Jesus said to even LOOK at a woman with lust is to commit adultery with her. Are women not setting up some Christian brothers to commit sins in their hearts by wearing revealing clothing? (I realize men will fantasize even if a woman is completely covered, but "letting it all hang out" does not help matters. I am saying find a balance.)

Angel Cake wrote:

Judah wrote:How much do clothes matter, and to whom?

After the Fall, God clothed Adam and Eve. Over and over again in the OT, nakedness is shameful. In the NT women are called to be modest. Clearly, clothes matter to God, or He would not have had the authors of the Scriptures discuss those topics.

How much??

Well, consider this. We are not supposed to cause our brother to stumble, yet many Christian women wear very skimpy clothing around their Christian brothers. Men are visually stimulated. Jesus said to even LOOK at a woman with lust is to commit adultery with her. Are women not setting up some Christian brothers to commit sins in their hearts by wearing revealing clothing? (I realize men will fantasize even if a woman is completely covered, but "letting it all hang out" does not help matters. I am saying find a balance.)

Well said, Angel Cake. Men are responsible to avert their eyes and keep their hearts and minds pure regarding the opposite sex, but some women make it very difficult for us. I'm sure there are instances where the opposite is true as well.

FFC wrote:I'm sure there are instances where the opposite is true as well.

There are. Some women become lustful toward a man when they see a man in tight pants or without a shirt. God covered ADAM, too.

Angel Cake wrote:There are. Some women become lustful toward a man when they see a man in tight pants or without a shirt. God covered ADAM, too.

Hopefully not in a g-string... That would be scary..