Wifely submission..........?????

[Manifestor_of_Light]

www.christiandd.com/index.html

[Mind_your_head]

1. Men can be stupid.....

but the women who 'depend on them' are even MORE stupid!?

[emad]

13. St Paul: rabid homophobe/misoginist with delusions of deity.

The whole sordid shooting match should be renamed Paulinity.

[Why Syzygy]

2. LOL!

BDSM in the name of GAWD!

• Domestic discipline is not spanking. A domestic discpline relationship begins when a couple decides that one partner will maintain a leadership role. For us, this means a married couple with the husband in that role. We also believe that DD means that the "head" will utlize discipline when necessary. What form that discipline will take is determined by each couple. Most couples who use domestic discipline will include spanking, but some do not.

[murielm99]

4. Oh, geeze.

I thought that two grownups married each other. How does one of them get to be treated like a child who needs to be punished? My husband and I argue and disagree sometimes, but we talk things out and compromise. Nobody gets punished. Punishing your mate is unhealthy, IMHO.

[sakabatou]

3. Ah, fundamentalism.

Ain't misogyny grand?

:sarcasm:

[saracat]

5. I cannot wish good things for these folks and perhaps, like them, I

choose not to be tolerant of them, nor do I wish to "understand" their credo.Bleh! Digusting people.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

6. Who'd a thunk it???

Sadomasochism and christianity going together.....naaah, we've never seen that combination before!!

:wtf:

[PDJane]

7. I have one of 'those' questions.

How did it become the norm for Americans to 'respect' every religious belief, no matter how destructive or anti-scientific or simply stupid?

Why should that be the case? Who would have thought that at the dawn of the 21st century, more people believe in evolution (aka 'intelligent design') than believe in evolution? How in the name of whomever did this kind of sloppy thinking get started and why does it continue?

[aquart]

9. Constitution respects religion. YOU do not have to.

That's in there, too. You can't bomb their churches, though. Kinda like some tribes use hallucinogens in their rituals. If they like S&M in theirs, they can wear all the black leather they want.

[PDJane]

22. That only means that the government can't stop you.

You can worship the pig down the road, and the government can't stop you. However, how and when did the business of the whole country respecting the pig-worshippers to the point that no-one will tell him the reason that the pig is there is to provide dinner?

I may figure that someone's beliefs are protected by law, but if I see this guy making offerings to the pig in his backyard, I have no reason to respect him and his pig, and not to tell him he's an idiot. I have been told that christianity sanctions the killing of all muslims. I didn't read that anywhere in the bible, and I felt no compunction in saying so. There's nothing in the bible that says christians should worship money, either, and I've always found that a bit un-christian.

If someone misreads the bible, then isn't it incumbent upon those who can and have read the text to tell these believers that they are wrong? When more than half the population believes in 'intelligent design' and can't find the book of genesis, isn't it time to say that you can believe whatever your little heart desires, but reality says that's just wrong?

Why is belief such a wonderful thing, when it contrasts so starkly with the real world?

[Chulanowa]

29. Uh... No?

Constitution directly prohibits the respect of religion. Constitutionally, religio n is a non-entity, something to not be considered.

[JerseygirlCT]

34. I don't think there's any obligation to respect any particular religious belief

there is an obligation to respect every person's right to hold a particular belief - or none at all.

Just like we honor the right of free speech, even when we deplore its use at times.

[aquart]

8. Jesus loves S&M?

Where is Betty Bower when you really need her?

[Why Syzygy]

11. It's kind of funny

that people are getting all anti-religous over this. I know a few Doms and Subs, and their play has nothing whatsoever to do with religion!

[The Magistrate]

18. That, Ma'am, Does Not Sound Like A Very Wide Sampling....

It is a simple fact that Christianity is saturated with sado-masochistic paradigms and imagery, and this doubtless has some influence in shaping the sexual awakenings of some exposed to it. There is a good deal of sado-masochistic pornography and erotica in circulation with explicitly religious settings and themes, though it is more commonly produced and encountered in Europe than in the United States. Artistic productions in this field both reflect and influence actual role-playing behavior among those so oriented. The degree of contempt for the body and sexual pleasure also found in Christian tradition plays a role; persons who have come to feel sexual urges and behavior are 'filthy' are prone to desire being 'punished' for them, or being 'forced' into doing them, as either course mitigates responsibility for the percieved transgressive acts, which are in fact natural and unavoidable human desires.

[PassingFair]

20. What'chu talkin 'bout?

[Why Syzygy]

21. Thank you for the sex ed.

I guess. Of course we know that most of the imagery of Christendom didn't originate with Christ at all, being predated by paganism.

Wide sampling? Of what? My acquaintances? No, they are a minority among my acquaintances. If it's a WIDE sampling you want, use the Google. Join a yahoo group.

Wonder if you caught the ad being put out by our GOVERNMENT purportedly to encourage parents to talk to their children about sex? The spokes-child in the ad refers to it as "embarrassing". The message? Wait. For what, they don't say. The "dirty" cannot be laid at the feet solely of religion either. The hypocritical government carries its load. Seen any torture photos?

[The Magistrate]

33. Best To Equip Yourself, Ma'am, With Sound Background Before Engaging On Recondite Subjects

It is certainly possible to trace some of the sense of 'dirtiness' of sexuality and the body to philosophical ideas current in the Late Hellenist period, which divided spirit from matter and ascribed purity to the former and corruption to the latter. These ideas, however, had a good deal to echo them in teh background of texts in the Abrahamic tradition once they were taken over by Christian intellectuals. They reached far wider currency and popular effect in Christendom than they had ever managed in antiquity.

Your claim concerning pagan origins of Christian symbolism on this line is particularly weak. That a particular form of execution was common currency for rebels in the Roman Empire says nothing about the decision of early Christian figures to exalt it into the symbol of their faith, and to dwell in loving detail on the event as a central mystery of their devotion. Nor has it any relevance to the founding of the tradition of martyr's hagiographies or the adoption of self-abuse under the rubric 'mortification of the flesh' so marked in the religious practices of the Medieval period, and still to be found to this day in some subdivisions of Catholicism particularly. It is of no avail to point to ascetic disciplines of other creeds, for these were un-known to the divines of that day, and not taken from them. That sado-masochism springs from roots deeper than religion springs is a fair enough statement, and that it peeks out in a variety of religious traditions is a testament to this.

You seem to be proceeding on the premise that association of sado-masochism with religion demeans religion, and is adduced for that purpose. This requires a feeling or belief that sado-masochism is something wrong to have any force as an objection. But that is not what is going on here, nor is it what affronts most people here about this particular item. The belief that a set of practices is divinely mandated seriously impairs the concept of consensuality, even where both parties accept that view of the matter.

[ironbark]

10. What ever happened to the Missionary Position?

[fasttense]

12. Unfortunately this gives wife batterers and abusers an excuse

to pummel their punching bag of choice - their wives and children.

[MineralMan]

14. You got it in one.

[Sal316]

15. People like that are idiots....

...because they often forget the part about husbands submitting to their wives.

Paul did not mean "listen to me, woman!". It's a model for a perfect marriage where each spouse puts the other one first. It's about serving each other selflessly.

Idiots who use it to justify their misogyny are just as misguided as those who think it's misogynistic to begin with. Both miss the point completely.

[laconicsax]

25. Which part is that?

I've never come across a part of the Bible that indicates that husbands must submit to their wives and all but one wedding I've attended included a reading of Ephesians 5:22-25.

²²Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. ²³For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. ²⁴Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.²⁵Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

Followed by the pastor explaining how this is an example of an equal marriage--that the wife completely submits to the husband and in exchange, the husband loves his wife enough to die for her.

They always stop the reading at 5:25 although I'm not sure why since the instruction to the husband seems to continue until verse 28 or 29.

[Sal316]

27. I don't understand why either...

They always stop the reading at 5:25 although I'm not sure why since the instruction to the husband seems to continue until verse 28 or 29.

Exactly... but you always hear only one side and, quite honestly, it pisses me off.

Perhaps The Message translation can say it better than me:

"Husbands, go all out in your love for your wives, exactly as Christ did for the church—a love marked by giving, not getting. Christ's love makes the church whole. His words evoke her beauty. Everything he does and says is designed to bring the best out of her, dressing her in dazzling white silk, radiant with holiness. And that is how husbands ought to love their wives. They're really doing themselves a favor—since they're already "one" in marriage."

Although the word submit is not used in the husband section, what is described goes far, far beyond that. We've lost the meaning of this over the centuries, preferring to focus on making women obey men and ignoring that we are to submit completely to our wives and spend our lives lifting them up, giving, not getting, doing nothing but glorifying our wives through word and deed.

[rrneck]

16. The magic

of niche marketing thunders ahead apace.

[The Magistrate]

17. So It Does, Sir....

[raccoon]

19. "Domestic Discipline?" AKA "Wife beating?" Gag! nt

[rd_kent]

23. Sounds like an S&M site!!!!

[heidler1]

24. This is just another way to cook up and promote a misunderstanding

of the bible, or other religious books, so the words selected approve of the right to be boss, greedy, full fill weird sexual fantasies and on and on. This is why religion is so obviously just a tool of mankind's desires.

[dorkulon]

31. It is:

http://www.christiandd.com/freestories/chula/catboxfirst.html

[iris27]

26. Oh, FFS...what sexist nonsense!

This is just old-school sexism dressed up with a few Bible verses, from guys who have a kink for domination but probably think the standard S/M scene is "too gay" with all that leather. That or they're the assholes who stand in the corner and spout off that male dom/female sub is the "natural" and only correct pairing.

Gag.

[Canuckistanian]

28. Well, technically, it's "corporal correction" of wives

It's like heavy bondage, but without the "safe word".

[joshcryer]

30. I only recommended this because it is hilarious and awesome.

Not the fact that women actually believe this, but because there's clearly an erotic component to it, and they're trying to justify their underlying erotic desires with religion, it's awesome.

[intaglio]

32. It's Christian Dom/Sub

DS is a well known lifestyle and, as occasional role play, can be fun. My partner and I have tried that role play and enjoyed it but we would not want to live that way the whole time but there are people who do live and enjoy the lifestyle.

Word of warning, if you want to try role play in your private life, whatever that role play ensure you have safe word or words. No matter how frivolous that game seems the safe words must stop it.