Her pinkness saves

^what he said.^

Deacon Doubtmonger

Agreed, plus the second man (representing goddy-buck) declared something to be shameful on the basis of his personal whims and feelings only, with no thought for the dog, nor for why he felt dog ownership to be immoral -- i.e., how he arrived at that conclusion. It would have been no comfort to the dog if the second man held up a notebook full of cryptic and contradictory rules and yelled, "IT'S IMMORAL! THIS HOLY BOOK IS MY INSPIRED WORD AND SAYS SO!"

ghostofthechameleon

I can't post an interpretation without feeling the need to shout, "DUHHH!!!!!" at myself. I'd be willing to bet that most others feel the same.


`dp

Lógos Sokratikós

It's about pent up sexuality.

Conservative Christians think human nature is vile. But when you repress your sexuality, you don't give your chance to live it and learn from it. You don't know your likes or dislikes, and it ends up wild (untrained and full of bottled up frustration). Then when you can't take it anymore it just bursts out.

That was my perception of Haggard's scandal.

You have to know that you can feel fed up of your spouse and you can feel attracted to others. You have to know that if you are attracted to members of the same sex it doesn't mean that there is "something wrong" with you, and it's not your fault.

Conservative Christianity does not prepare poeple to handle these issues assertive and successfully.


Thanks, Aesop Ebonmuse!
Lógos Sokratikós