4 ms·

Doesn't seem like you're asking this in good faith, so I won't spend much time here, but: there are answers to this question if you're willing to seek them out.

fahadkhan 7y ago
Assuming the omnipotent creator exists. If he/she/it doesn't exist then the question is hypothetical.
- heinrichhartman 7y ago
  Exactly. It's important to distinguish those two questions: A. Does a creator exist? B. If so, would it care about where we put our sexual organs? I see those often conflated: "There can't be something from nothing, so the universe must have been created, so the Bible must be true!" -- Eh. WAT?
  - elwell 7y ago
    > Why would an omnipotent creator (who deals with Stars/Earth/Moon/All living Species) care so deeply what we do with our reproductive organs? Why would a Creator create humans and then not care deeply about them?
    - heinrichhartman 7y ago
      Well, apparently it [the creator] did not just create us, but also: - billions of other stars - millions of other species on earth, 99.9% of which died out. yet ... - it supposedly, only really cares about one special species, which he created as "his equal", - and supposedly, is deeply offended if a young boy masturbates in the privacy of his bedroom. This is not only very wasteful and cruel, but also invasive and incredibly narrow-minded.
  - Brendinooo 7y ago
    A is an important question, but a completely different subject altogether. B would follow from A being true, and how the question is answered depends on the nature of the creator and his relationship with his creation. Some might the Deist route and say that the watchmaker wound the watch and walked away. I argue for a creator that cares deeply about human flourishing on an individual, interpersonal, and societal level, and would thus want to regulate something that is immensely consequential for all of these spheres. There's an idolatry angle as well, but I don't wanna branch this thread too much.
  - azth 7y ago
    Your question reflects an underlying "anthropomorphising of God" fallacy.
heinrichhartman 7y ago
Well, I did not think this would be a controversial topic, amongst the HN community. But apparently I have struck a nerve, getting replies like this and downvotes. What I want to say is this: - Christianity makes very strong claims about moral and is very prescriptive about human behaviour, esp. around sexuality. - There is extraordinary little evidence that support any of their claims. This is quite a dissonance, no?
- Juliate 7y ago
  Partial answer. It comes from a time when Church was not only a spiritual power, but also a very temporal one, after Constantin brought it within the heart of the Roman Empire. From a time when society and lives were ruled quite in a top-down fashion.

fahadkhan 7y ago

Assuming the omnipotent creator exists. If he/she/it doesn't exist then the question is hypothetical.

heinrichhartman 7y ago
Exactly. It's important to distinguish those two questions: A. Does a creator exist? B. If so, would it care about where we put our sexual organs? I see those often conflated: "There can't be something from nothing, so the universe must have been created, so the Bible must be true!" -- Eh. WAT?
- elwell 7y ago
  > Why would an omnipotent creator (who deals with Stars/Earth/Moon/All living Species) care so deeply what we do with our reproductive organs? Why would a Creator create humans and then not care deeply about them?
  - heinrichhartman 7y ago
    Well, apparently it [the creator] did not just create us, but also: - billions of other stars - millions of other species on earth, 99.9% of which died out. yet ... - it supposedly, only really cares about one special species, which he created as "his equal", - and supposedly, is deeply offended if a young boy masturbates in the privacy of his bedroom. This is not only very wasteful and cruel, but also invasive and incredibly narrow-minded.
- Brendinooo 7y ago
  A is an important question, but a completely different subject altogether. B would follow from A being true, and how the question is answered depends on the nature of the creator and his relationship with his creation. Some might the Deist route and say that the watchmaker wound the watch and walked away. I argue for a creator that cares deeply about human flourishing on an individual, interpersonal, and societal level, and would thus want to regulate something that is immensely consequential for all of these spheres. There's an idolatry angle as well, but I don't wanna branch this thread too much.
- azth 7y ago
  Your question reflects an underlying "anthropomorphising of God" fallacy.

heinrichhartman 7y ago

Well, I did not think this would be a controversial topic, amongst the HN community. But apparently I have struck a nerve, getting replies like this and downvotes. What I want to say is this: - Christianity makes very strong claims about moral and is very prescriptive about human behaviour, esp. around sexuality. - There is extraordinary little evidence that support any of their claims. This is quite a dissonance, no?

Juliate 7y ago
Partial answer. It comes from a time when Church was not only a spiritual power, but also a very temporal one, after Constantin brought it within the heart of the Roman Empire. From a time when society and lives were ruled quite in a top-down fashion.