Re: Question for Huckleberry and Dakota
Submitted by Dakota on 2002-08-25 23:22:54, Sunday
In reply to Question for Huckleberry and Dakota submitted by drew on 2002-08-25 19:04:03, Sunday
|
I have 3 reasons I refrain from sexual contact with boys. 1) I believe it's pretty clearly not what God would want me to do. 2) The risk of emotional harm to the child is well documented and way too great. 3) It's illegal and can land me in prison. You said in another reply that for a non Christian, there is no sin so why not do it? Sin is sin, whether you are a Christian or not. If there is no God, then there is indeed no sin. But if there is a God, whether you believe in Him or not makes no difference in what is sin. God id not just a faith. He is a real living being. And if one violates His laws, don't think for a minute that claiming unbelief makes anyone immune to them. But trying to adhere to what He would want me to do has nothing to do with eventual consequences in heaven. There may indeed be consequences here on Earth, but being saved by faith means that I will still go to heaven and be forgiven. The main religious consequence with sin is that it takes me further away from God. This is why I try to follow what He would want me to do, not to mention the fact that He's always known what was best for me in the past. You site some examples you saw of adult child sexual relationships that you claim changed your mind on the propriety of such relationships. But can you honestly say the sex was the cause of that happy relationship? Or was it IN SPITE of the sex. I believe it to be the latter. I can accept that there are occasions where the child is not harmed at all by a sexual relationship. That's not the majority, but it can happen. But I believe very strongly that the great relationship you speak of witnessing could have been had without the sex. So the question comes to mind as to why would anyone risk emotionally harming a child by introducing sex in the relationship, hoping that he has found one of the minority of boys that won't be harmed? The answer is clear......for his own pleasure. And I don't want to hear any tripe about how the man always makes sure the boy enjoys it too. Remember I'm a boylover too, and I know full well that sex with a boy is not just physical but emotional, and pleasing the boy gives the man emotional pleasure. So it still comes down to selfishness, no matter how we try to cloak it as a mutual thing. To answer your other question is difficult considering this board's desire not to talk about illegal activities. Moderator, feel free to edit this if it goes beyond what is accepted. But let's just say I have "witnessed" with my own eyes 2 man/boy relationships that eventually turned sexual a very long time ago. In both cases, the relationship was much better before sex was introduced, even though I could say it was a "mutual" thing. It's hard to explain, but adding sex added a component that didn't really fit into the friendship. It's hard to be a mentor and friend while also being a sex partner. It just doesn't work. Only God knows if the boys were emotionally harmed, but the man in the relationships is regretting it for the rest of his life. So I'll say it again with emphasis. ANY BENEFITS IN A MAN/BOY FRIENDSHIP CAN BE HAD WITHOUT TAKING THE HUGE RISK OF INTRODUCING SEX IN THE MIX. Dakota |
Follow ups: