Will you/do you teach your children about D/s?

[graceanne]

I really really didn't mean to post to this again, cause as Jay said I'm not going to change his mind or he mine, but I just wanted to address a few things real quick.

1) I know that if my Christian friends found out that K and I are D/s that their'd be trouble. I don't really care. As a rule I don't particularly like other Christians. I didn't get along with them before we got into BDSM and I won't now either, and it has nothing to do with our sex life. I'm, quite frankly, a lousy Christian. I cuss, I look at porn, I have conversations with homeless people that have nothing to do with converting them. I think that the world needs less 'conversion' and a lot more love. Artic Stranger and I joked once about starting a church for people who are devoted to God, but lousy Christians.

2) I am not living my life as I think that it should be. It's impossible to do. I dont' know of anyone who does, although I know plenty who pretend really well. I did not mean to make it look like I'm looking down on anyone. What I was saying is what I plan on teaching my children. I plan on teaching them how I thing that God wanted it to be, and then stepping back while they forge their way in life. The only thing I care about is that they accept that Jesus died for them, beyond that it's all theology as far as I'm concerned. The reason I will teach them this is because this is what has made me happy. I want my children to be happy. I think that's behind what we all decide to teach our children, we want them to be happy. I was miserable before Jesus. As a matter of fact I had attempted suicide three times. I can't imagine life without Him, and if He weren't there I'd let the Crohns have me. I want my children to have the kind of strength that'll get you through hard times. I'm asked why I remain cheerful when I'm sick. I personally think it's because I know that Jesus is with me.

Maybe I'm wrong, but until such a time as someone proves that their's another way that's what I'll teach my children.

 

[catalina_francisco]

That really scares me -that one day the country founded on freedoms to pursue life, liberty and happiness, will only be free to live in whatever manner the government deems fit to leave us.

Ummmm, I think you are living your fear now, just they manage to keep it cloaked enough at this point to mislead a percentage of the population into believing they still have rights and freedom. LOL, one of the BBC journo's returned from assignment in the US last year I think it was, and his simple but honest words were something along the lines of , 'Bless 'em, the Americans still think they live in a free country'.

Catalina

 

[jasonlf]

I know that if my Christian friends found out that K and I are D/s that their'd be trouble. I don't really care. As a rule I don't particularly like other Christians. I didn't get along with them before we got into BDSM and I won't now either, and it has nothing to do with our sex life.

Like I said when DVS asked me "Would you mind telling your pastor about your BDSM lifestyle" and my reply was "as much as I'd mind telling him anything else abuot my sex life"

 

[Jay Davis]

I don't give a rat's ass what impression the Falwells, the DeLays, the Frists or the Bushes think about me personally. I also defend the rights of gays/lesbians/bi- to live the way they want to live as long as it is consensual and doesn't physically hurt anyone outside the relationship (unfortunately there are some family members who will feel emotionally injured no matter what people do... *sigh*) I seem to recall one time a number of years back (1980 I think - and either Georgia or Alabama but I could be wrong) there was a sodomy law was challeneged in court - the police broke into someone home and arrested two people who were practicing anal sex - the court threw the case against the arrested men out since sodomy was the *only* reason they were arrested. The rights of consenting adults in the privacy of their own home was upheld... at least at the time.

This is one reason why I dislike the "Patriot Act." It give far too many rights to law enforcement and strips away too many of the "traditional" privacy rights that were once upheld in court - now everything looks like a terrorist, except the terrorists. That really scares me -that one day the country founded on freedoms to pursue life, liberty and happiness, will only be free to live in whatever manner the government deems fit to leave us.

The thing is, as long as Bush, Frist, DeLay and their ilk are in power, we HAVE to care what they think about us, because they can, will, and already are using the power they hold to punish and oppress people they don't like. If you want to hold onto your rights to privacy, sexual freedom, and freedom of expression, you HAVE to be concerned about what the middle-aged, rich, white, Christian men who currently control the country think and do about you.

The sodomy case you're referring to happened in Texas. It wound up being appealed all the way to either the state or federal Supreme Court (I'd have to google a bit to remember which, but I'm pretty sure it was federal) before the judicial system actually took a stand in defense of the defendants' constitutional right to privacy. Again, this is an example that proves we HAVE to be concerned about what the people who run the country think. Cases of this sort that have made it to the Supreme Court have generally been decided in favor of privacy and freedom of expression over the past 20 years--usually by a 5-4 vote. A little over a month ago, that 5th vote in favor of constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms over expansive government authority, Sandra Day O'Connor, announced her retirement. Just exactly who the Bushes, Frists, and DeLays in Wasthington pick to replace her is going to have an immense impact on our lifestyle, and our freedom to even discuss it, for 20, 30, even 40 years.

This is really, REALLY important stuff. How it plays out will determine whether we are all criminals, pornographers, and sex-offenders simply because we've posted to this forum.

Regarding the US PATRIOT act (capitalized because it's actually a rather insulting acronym, not just a name, and the "US" is part of that acronym), PL, you're exactly correct. That package of law enforcement powers authorizes police and intelligence agencies to gather virtually unlimited private information on American citizens, without any sort of judicial review or other outside oversight, on the flimsiest pretext of "national security." Let me give a not-at-all-implausible example.

The US PATRIOT act authorizes the FBI to demand records of the books you've borrowed from any library, and the books you've bought from any bookseller. Let's say you happen to know someone who knows someone who once met a member of an Islamic congregation in your town where a suspected terrorist sympathizer prayed one time. On a pretext of national security, without having to get any warrant from a judge, the FBI orders Amazon.com to hand over the records of your online book purchases. Fortunately, you've never bought the Anarchist's Cookbook or a biography of Osama bin Laden, but you did pick up a copy of Mein Kampf for a college World War II history class three years ago, and you bought Screw the Roses, SM 101, and The New Bottoming Book last summer. So, you may not be an Islamic terrorist, but now the FBI has evidence they can use to build a case that you're sexual deviant with pro-Nazi sympathies. Congratulations, you're now on the FAA's Watched list, and you'll be strip-searched any time you try to board a commercial airliner. Oh, and the real kicker? Not only do they not have to tell you they're watching you, but it's a federal crime for Amazon.com to let you know that the FBI demanded those records--so you don't know you're under surviellance until they slap the cuffs on you and haul you away.

OK, at this point, I'm concerned that I'm coming across as a liberal nutbar, which I'm not. In actuality, I'm very much a moderate, but the particular guys in power at the moment are SO far to the right that even the middle ground looks radical by comparison. But regardless of whether those in control in Washington have any right to have an opinion about us, the fact is, they DO have that opinion, they have the power to hurt us because of it, and have repeated demonstrated a willingness to do just that.

 

[Netzach]

The thing is, as long as Bush, Frist, DeLay and their ilk are in power, we HAVE to care what they think about us, because they can, will, and already are using the power they hold to punish and oppress people they don't like. If you want to hold onto your rights to privacy, sexual freedom, and freedom of expression, you HAVE to be concerned about what the middle-aged, rich, white, Christian men who currently control the country think and do about you.

The sodomy case you're referring to happened in Texas. It wound up being appealed all the way to either the state or federal Supreme Court (I'd have to google a bit to remember which, but I'm pretty sure it was federal) before the judicial system actually took a stand in defense of the defendants' constitutional right to privacy. Again, this is an example that proves we HAVE to be concerned about what the people who run the country think. Cases of this sort that have made it to the Supreme Court have generally been decided in favor of privacy and freedom of expression over the past 20 years--usually by a 5-4 vote. A little over a month ago, that 5th vote in favor of constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms over expansive government authority, Sandra Day O'Connor, announced her retirement. Just exactly who the Bushes, Frists, and DeLays in Wasthington pick to replace her is going to have an immense impact on our lifestyle, and our freedom to even discuss it, for 20, 30, even 40 years.

This is really, REALLY important stuff. How it plays out will determine whether we are all criminals, pornographers, and sex-offenders simply because we've posted to this forum.

Regarding the US PATRIOT act (capitalized because it's actually a rather insulting acronym, not just a name, and the "US" is part of that acronym), PL, you're exactly correct. That package of law enforcement powers authorizes police and intelligence agencies to gather virtually unlimited private information on American citizens, without any sort of judicial review or other outside oversight, on the flimsiest pretext of "national security." Let me give a not-at-all-implausible example.

The US PATRIOT act authorizes the FBI to demand records of the books you've borrowed from any library, and the books you've bought from any bookseller. Let's say you happen to know someone who knows someone who once met a member of an Islamic congregation in your town where a suspected terrorist sympathizer prayed one time. On a pretext of national security, without having to get any warrant from a judge, the FBI orders Amazon.com to hand over the records of your online book purchases. Fortunately, you've never bought the Anarchist's Cookbook or a biography of Osama bin Laden, but you did pick up a copy of Mein Kampf for a college World War II history class three years ago, and you bought Screw the Roses, SM 101, and The New Bottoming Book last summer. So, you may not be an Islamic terrorist, but now the FBI has evidence they can use to build a case that you're sexual deviant with pro-Nazi sympathies. Congratulations, you're now on the FAA's Watched list, and you'll be strip-searched any time you try to board a commercial airliner. Oh, and the real kicker? Not only do they not have to tell you they're watching you, but it's a federal crime for Amazon.com to let you know that the FBI demanded those records--so you don't know you're under surviellance until they slap the cuffs on you and haul you away.

OK, at this point, I'm concerned that I'm coming across as a liberal nutbar, which I'm not. In actuality, I'm very much a moderate, but the particular guys in power at the moment are SO far to the right that even the middle ground looks radical by comparison. But regardless of whether those in control in Washington have any right to have an opinion about us, the fact is, they DO have that opinion, they have the power to hurt us because of it, and have repeated demonstrated a willingness to do just that.

The country has always been controlled by rich white Christian men, this is not a news flash.

The case was Bowers V. Hardwick. People had been screwing each other in the ass and sucking each other off in droves despite the sodomy laws, whether it's legal or not and I'd argue will continue to do so legal or not. Sex laws require people to go to frightening extremes to enforce them and even then remain fundementally unenforceable, because sex desire and attraction can't be legislated, never could. The frantic attempts of these silly people to legislate sexuality is, in my mind, the evidence that they've lost the culture wars and know it. A reactionary spasm.

 

[AppleBiter]

Will I teach my children about D/s? Absolutely not.

 

[graceanne]

What bugs me about the laws they're passing about pornography is they're ridiculous. As long as their's a market for pornography their will be someone willing to provide that service. People have been trying to end prostitution for . . . like forever. They've never succeeded. Why? Cause no matter how illegal they make it, their will always be people willing to pay for sex. And as long as their are people willing to pay for sex their will be people willing to sell it. If they want to end either practices, their needs to be change in the hearts of people, and i don't see that happening.

 

[Jay Davis]

The country has always been controlled by rich white Christian men, this is not a news flash.

With all due respect, Netzach, I think the current group of rich white Christian men is very different from and far, far more dangerous than the ones who've run things in the past.

I typed up a long response, with examples, but I've deleted it, because this thread--which actually started to be about a very important topic--has been hopelessly hijacked. Since I've become one of the chief hijackers, I'm going to try very hard to reverse that trend, and stop perpetuating the hijacking.

 

[FurryFury]

Marquis,

Here is a site with funny baby T'shirts.

http://www.tshirthell.com/babyhell.shtml

Made me laugh!

Fury

 

[FurryFury]

While back to school shopping with my son yesterday he asked me if I had ever done Anal sex, given his father a blow job and what I liked better, one of those or intercourse.

This kid is a card I tell ya!

Fury

 

[Marquis]

While back to school shopping with my son yesterday he asked me if I had ever done Anal sex, given his father a blow job and what I liked better, one of those or intercourse.

This kid is a card I tell ya!

Fury

That reminds me of something I would say as a kid. My mom and I were way too close.

What was your response?

 

[FurryFury]

Well, first I asked him if he really felt he wanted to know that much about his Mom and Dad's sex life and we talked about why.

Then I told him the truth. I explained some of the details about anal sex too which he claims he would never want to do. Yeah, right, but he is clearly curious about it so he needs a few safety tips and such given to him.

So I told him yes I had done both, however I told him I really couldn't pick which one I liked better between vaginal and anal sex.

I wish he'd ask his Dad things like this. I'd love to be the fly on the wall watching and listening when he did.

Now I've talked with both my kids about anal sex. Wow. All my Mom told me was "Don't look, touch or thing about things 'down there.'"

Fury