Where is that elusive line?

[luvnaturism]

There seems to be a certain amount of discomfort generated in response to some discussions of a religious/moral/ethical nature on these pages. It causes me to ask, "What's appropriate in a forum of this kind?"

The administrators have provided a category called "Nudity and Religion." Within that category conversations that link the two topics are a natural fit. Yet sometimes I find myself uneasy at what I'm reading.

I don't like too much agreement in a forum. It's dull, and I'm not learning anything when I'm just reading comments that I could have written myself. I like a sharp edge in a forum. But there has to be a boundary line, elusive as it may be.

I like it when people of whatever persuasion are expressing their strongly-held views. It is uncomfortable when the tone becomes, "Anyone who has a different opinion is an idiot."

The discussion passes from discomfort to offensive when people make statements that put down entire categories of people on the basis of religion, race, or sexual identity. I'm not OK when the implication becomes "People who don't fit my categories are substandard and impaired."

I'm a very involved Christian with strong convictions. In my own life the Bible is authoritative. However, I recognize that the Bible is only accepted as authority by those who have accepted its authority. Therefore in this forum, where people of all persuasions participate, my view is that we leave the realm of reality when we respond to a post from a non-Christian with an argument based on the assumption that the writer must recognize the Bible as being relevant to them.

[luvnaturism]

There seems to be a certain amount of discomfort generated in response to some discussions of a religious/moral/ethical nature on these pages. It causes me to ask, "What's appropriate in a forum of this kind?"

The administrators have provided a category called "Nudity and Religion." Within that category conversations that link the two topics are a natural fit. Yet sometimes I find myself uneasy at what I'm reading.

I don't like too much agreement in a forum. It's dull, and I'm not learning anything when I'm just reading comments that I could have written myself. I like a sharp edge in a forum. But there has to be a boundary line, elusive as it may be.

I like it when people of whatever persuasion are expressing their strongly-held views. It is uncomfortable when the tone becomes, "Anyone who has a different opinion is an idiot."

The discussion passes from discomfort to offensive when people make statements that put down entire categories of people on the basis of religion, race, or sexual identity. I'm not OK when the implication becomes "People who don't fit my categories are substandard and impaired."

I'm a very involved Christian with strong convictions. In my own life the Bible is authoritative. However, I recognize that the Bible is only accepted as authority by those who have accepted its authority. Therefore in this forum, where people of all persuasions participate, my view is that we leave the realm of reality when we respond to a post from a non-Christian with an argument based on the assumption that the writer must recognize the Bible as being relevant to them.

[Kenny G]

Unfortunatly, many discussions comparing diferent viewpoints of the various religions really turn into all out slugfests. I, myself, have my own beliefs, but generally shy away from religious topics. Don't get me wrong, I try to read the different threads on all the topics, I just don't usually post replys. There are alot of, let's just call them "strong willed", outspoken zealots, that are ready to take up arms against those who don't agree with thier religious position. I prefer to stay non-confrontational, if you know what I mean. I don't subscribe to any particular organised religion, except to say that my beliefs are predominatly Christian in nature. I believe in the word of the Bible, but I don't like some one to tell me what it means. I do believe that if you're looking for an answer, you;ll find it in the Bible. But, not necessarilly where the preacher says it's at. I think the Bible was written in such a way that it's open to some measure of interpretation, and the way that I understand a passage to read isn't always the same way that you might read it to mean. So, if we derive to different meanings from the same passage, does that make one of us wrong? I don't think that it does, I think that our God (by whatever name we choose to call Him by) speaks to each individual through his/her own heart. So, I'm pretty sure there's others like me that shy away from subjects likely to start a flame war. Also, if anyone ever posted thier beliefs and got torched because of it, probably is in no hurry to go through it again. Skyclad, in another thread, posted her joining a Wiccan group. I must admit total lack of knowledge to the practices and beliefs of the Wicca, however I fully support her in her decision to choose the path that's right for her. Is anyone's beliefs more right or wrong than mine, who am I to say? "To each his own", "Live and let live", and so forth. I'll discus facts, opinions, and experiences all day long, but when the topic goes to ethical/moral issues don't expect to see me. I'll be here reading, but I'll stay out of the crossfire. As for my own choice? I think Whitesnake said it best in a song, "Here I go again on my own....goin' down the only road I've ever known..." Peace

[Trailscout]

Luvnaturism,

I wish everyone could be like you in the way you so readily distinguish a disagreement from a put-down.
If we can't discuss values, ethics and even religion here, this might as well be a forum on nudist vacations and treatments for sunburn.

One of the most controversial threads centers around behavior that some perceive as incompatible with nudist values. Lack of regard for one's own health (characterized by obesity, poor diet, lack of exercise, smoking etc.) seem at odds with European health movement origins of nudism.

Body modifications, such as piercings and tattoos, particularly mods that draw attention to the genitals, seem to mock the original spirit of nudism. The shaving fad was obviously never a part of nudism until very recent times as evidenced by photos documenting our movement, and the very fussiness and self-absorption it fosters seem laughably inconsistent with the natural hairy look we have promoted for generations.

The exclusive nature of many resorts seems to be in conflict with traditional family nudism in the case of resorts that ban children. I would be interested to read whether singles were originally banned from nudist resorts to the extent that they are now. One could say that singles are not families and don't belong in a family resort, but if nudism doesn't bring in new blood, that is singles who could meet and marry and breed a new generation of nudists, organized social nudism could die with the current generation. I am not aware of resorts that ban gays from nudist venues, although it seems that their presence seems like a logical inconsistency with hetero family nudism. A ban on gays at resorts would make perfect sense.

Swinging and homosexual activity of course is largely conducted in private and I don't know how these behaviors can be eliminated from nudist venues. The best we can do is make families with children and singles of good character feel as welcome as possible. A clean wholesome environment tends to attract people of that caliber.

It would be rash to assume that everyone on this forum is ready to accept the Holy Bible. Fair enough. However, it gives me a rash when some post how irritated they are that the Bible is quoted by two Christians exchanging ideas with each other. I guess the same goes for poor unsuspecting newbies who get flamed for asking "what will people think of me if I get an erection at a nudist resort?" Typically they are chided and told to run a keyword search on posts from 2 years ago.
The fact is, no topic will appeal to all readers. It is easier to ask disinterested parties to ignore the thread than it is to ask the posters to change the subject.

I think you understand the boundary in debates quite well when you say, "Anyone who has a different opinion is an idiot."

I hear no racial putdowns on this forum and few disparaging comments about other belief systems, except for those that reject social nudity. I think we can tolerate intolerance of those who do not tolerate nudity.

I don't think sexual orientation per se has been condemned. Most of us recognize that we wake up one day and realize whether we are AC or DC and have little choice in the matter.

However, it does not logically follow that people of either orientation are driven to madness like a rutting moose and we must mount the nearest object of our passion or die. There is moral accountibility for failing to maintain celibacy before marriage or taking a vow of lifetime celibacy if there is no moral way to satisfy our sexual urges, whether we are obsessed with animals, children, the dead, or people of our own sex. Having an obsession does not constitute a right to fulfil that desire.

It is indeed tragic when people reject the Bible, and I have seen more and more that unless the Holy Spirit illumines our darkened hearts, no matter how many substantiating facts and logic we hear, we persist in our path to destruction.

If I quote scripture here, it is for the benefit of those who accept it, but question the compatibility of social nudism with good Christian living.

We have a certain duty to clear up misconceptions about the Bible when we are directly challenged, but it is beyond the scope of this forum to address the complete spiritual needs of an ernest seeker of the truth.

[nacktman]

I learned a long time ago that the old adage of never discussing Sex, Politics or Religion with your friends or enemies was a wise course to be true. I am with Kenny G I enjoy reading this forum but do not post very often because of some of the opinions that are posted have been acerbic and really have no place in a forum to discuss and debate ideas and opinions. All of us that are alive have our own notions as to the ethical, moral character we want to hold ourselves to and what we expect others to adhere to. This can be similar to the collective mass of humanity or as deviant as to be just for oursleves, and as humans we desire to surround ourselves with what we feel comfortable with, so it is true that we form into groups of "like-minded folk" at every opportunity we can. Also, there are those who do lash out to distance themselves from anything different from their view of the cosmos.
The "fine" line of the posts to this forum is what we make it...in my opinion I feel the forum should be used to discuss the nudist life, social nudism and what are interest are because we have far more people reading the forum than posting and I'd wager quite a few of those are not nudists and of the non-nudists reading this there are some attempting to "Find the Dirt on them damn nudists" for their own agenda what ever that may be; Therefore it would be in the interest of us all to maintain a sense of self and not degrade the discussions in this forum to the sewers some other fourms I have read have sunk to. While I have not read anything in this forum that approaches the rants and illogical tirades, and ravings I have seen in other forums, I have seen some posts that have been a bit on the snitty side but they have been concerning the taboo 3-sex, politics and religion for the most part. We all have sex in whatever fashion, we all participate in politics to some degree, we all have our faith in the sacred whatever that may be, so Let's agree to disagree on theses subjects and discuss all topics with as much rationality as we can without losing our passion for the topic for without rationality their can be no discussion and without passion there can be no discussion, but allowed to wander to irrationality or to apathy this forum will become a quagmire of spit and spittle and nothing more.

Be Nude, Be Free and all will be well in your world.

[Vin]

quote:

---

Originally posted by luvnaturism:
[qb]I like it when people of whatever persuasion are expressing their strongly-held views. It is uncomfortable when the tone becomes, "Anyone who has a different opinion is an idiot."

The discussion passes from discomfort to offensive when people make statements that put down entire categories of people on the basis of religion, race, or sexual identity. I'm not OK when the implication becomes "People who don't fit my categories are substandard and impaired."[/qb]

---

I quite agree. I can handle comparing beliefs. I can handle the fact that those beliefs sometimes seem to disagree. I have a problem with someone saying or implying that I'm wrong because I believe something different from him/her. Often, we can both be right; after all, everything is relative.

I'm not sure how to make allowances for people who feel their religions require them to convert others or who feel that they have the right to pass judgement on someone else's path. On the one hand, they fear some Divine repercussion if they don't do those things, so prohibiting those behaviors might cause them harm (or at least stress). On the other, such behavior most definitely harms the vicitm, so it probably should be prohibited.

And then there are some who simply seem so completely convinced of their rightness that they don't even realize their attitudes are harmful to others. They can't stop themselves hijacking threads, because their worldview is so deeply ingrained it permeates everything they say. They literally seem unable to conceive that someone who disagrees with them may also be right or may take offense at their words.

All that said, I very much appreciate the Nudity and Religion forum. It's great for those who include ritual nudity in their religious practices, and it's great for those of us who are interested in the practices of religions other than our own.

BB,
Vin

An it harm none, do what you will.
--from the Wiccan Rede

[Jochanaan]

Those who condemn others who disagree with them, using "Christianity" as a basis, do not follow the example or teaching of Jesus of Nazareth, who said, "Love your enemies," and, "Judge not, lest ye be judged." No matter how passionately I may disagree with someone, with the Spirit's help I will never sit in judgment over another person even though I may think their actions are against God and/or nature.

[GO AWAY]

First of all TrailScout is the first to make personal attacks on people, him and RIVERRAT...so don't even try to come in here and act like you are innocent...

that was my Ten Cents...My two cents were free...

PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH PEOPLE...

that's all I will have to say in here...

TTFN

TaTa For Now

[Trailscout]

Miami,

If we were in a dining room in a nudist resort at adjacent tables and the room was small and crowded and I lit up one cigarette after the other, if you asked me to please refrain from smoking while you were eating with your family, would you be making a personal attack on me? Of course not.

What if I said, "that smoke ain't hurting you none!" Would that make everything all right? Courtesy sometimes demands that we not always demand our rights, be it the right to smoke or the right to wear offensive jewelry (even if it is just an opinion).

That's how I feel about people who try to enter a resort wearing genital jewelry. They are saying that they don't believe in nudism, but they want to come to a nudist resort anyway and tell people how bad nudism is whether they want to hear it or not.

I'd say, if you don't like nudism, please don't go to the resort and put our lifestyle down by wearing that stuff. That's not a personal attack either.

It's not the person it's the behavior that is not acceptable.

Miami you are so very right. Trailscout and Riverrat have said some very nasty things about gays, about Caliente resort, about piercings, about anything they don't believe in.

Opposing opinions are one thing...ignorant flames made by trolls are quite another and have no place on this messageboard. They need to take their hate and prejudice someplace else.

Trailscout you are a flaming troll no matter how you look at it. It is a shame you can't read the first two posts and actually *comprehend* them.