Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 6:08 amAnd, who inspected the genitals of the "nun" and the "sisters"? "Themselves"? Or, did they not have to be "virgins"?
Some nuns were devoted to lifelong chastity, same as priests.
HOW would you KNOW?
Did you CHECK them? Or, did you get "fathers" to CHECK them, FOR you?
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Others, I believe, joined the Sisterhood as means of penance and repentance. So there might have been reformed, previously promiscuous women among them.
you ARE COMPLETELY INCAPABLE OF COMPREHENDING, and ANSWERING, the ACTUAL QUESTIONS that I pose, and ask you, right?
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 6:08 amBut, WHY would someone tell the Truth if they were going to be judged, disciplined, punished, humiliated, and/or not be allowed to do what they wanted to do, like, for example, 'getting married'?
Because some families value Truth, Trust, and Wisdom of their Elders, before short-term gains and hedonistic pursuits.
ONCE AGAIN, you did NOT COMPREHEND and UNDERSTAND the ACTUAL QUESTION that I posed, and asked you, here.
Also, let 'us' NOT FORGET that it was the so-called 'wisdom of the elders', which has LED the "west" TO THE MESS that it is in, in the days when this is being written.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 6:08 amLOL Why did they, supposedly, HAVE TO?
Also, this one, OBVIOUSLY, still has absolutely NO idea what the word 'marriage' was actually meaning and referring to, EXACTLY.
Because promiscuous women cannot Marry in a House of God. It's a Sin, and a violation of His Law.
AGAIN, this one, OBVIOUSLY, has NO idea NOR clue as to what the words 'sin' AND 'marriage' ACTUALLY MEAN and REFER TO, EXACTLY.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
It's a betrayal, to God and Husband. Trust in her, like her hymen, is already broken. She's devoted to another man, not her Husband.
you, and your kind, are VERY 'INSECURE', here.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 6:08 amSo, to this one anyway, ALL "orphans" are BECAUSE their biological fathers abandoned them when they were born. And, there were NO other reasons.
I didn't come up with the Terms and Rules or God's Laws...so don't blame me for it.
See, HOW ones like 'this one' KEEP 'trying to' DEFLECT, and DECEIVE, WHEN I SHOW and POINT OUT their CONTRADICTIONS, INCONSISTENCIES, and/or Falsehoods.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
If you abandon your children, then that is Bastardization.
TO 'you', and 'your society', ONLY.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Bastards beget more bastards.
LOL And, WHO begot the FIRST so-called "bastard"? God, Itself?
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
The term "Bastard" is derogatory against promiscuous and sloven peasants.
you speak, here, as though 'you', and 'your ilk', are NOT the LOWEST of them ALL.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
In the Medieval Eras, when Catholicism dominated, a family's reputation meant everything. You couldn't rise up in Class, while going against the Church and God's Laws.
That people, like you, create and see 'class' just SHOWS and PROVES HOW LOW you REALLY ARE.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
This meant that your family had to subscribe to Morals and Ethics, often against personal will or individualistic desire.
WHO CARES?
you are OBVIOUSLY DESCRIBING and EXPLAINING the very reasons WHY 'your society', or the "west", STARTED its DECLINE.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 6:08 amLOL This one could not be MORE NARROWED or CLOSED in its view/s, here?
Also, LOL 'should'.
So you'd rather complete strangers take care of your orphaned children, should you die, than your own family and kin?
That's ridiculous.
Just how Truly BLIND and CLOSED this one REALLY IS would be UNBELIEVABLE if it was NOT ALREADY, EXACTLY, KNOWN WHY it IS.
And, WHY this one MAKES and JUMPS TO these Truly ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS and STUPID ASSUMPTIONS and CONCLUSIONS is ALSO ALREADY KNOWN, AS WELL.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 6:08 amI only asked you, What even is a 'bastard', to you.
No one really cares what other views you have, here.
Everybody cares, especially you.
REALLY?
Name ONE person, here, who REALLY CARES about 'your views', here.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 6:08 amBut, HOW is a father meant to 'be there' with the daughters ALWAYS?
you really do have some very funny views and BELIEFS, here.
It's called Trust, something foreign to you, obviously.
So, all one HAS TO DO, in 'your view' is just 'Trust' the daughter AND ALL of the males around her.
Like I said, BEFORE, you REALLY do have some very funny views and BELIEFS, here.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 6:08 amWhich you are a part of and part of a cause of, correct?
Or, do you not include "yourself", here?
Yes, if I had a daughter, then I'd not want her cavorting with peasants, the circus, gypsies, criminals, drug-dealers, and the like.
ONCE AGAIN, this one has COMPLETELY and UTTERLY MISSED AND MISUNDERSTOOD what is being SAID, and MEANT.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
This SHOULD BE common sense. But it's not, in 2025. This is something you have to re-educate the public with, even so-called "Adults".
So, AMONG the "NON PEASANTS", like "yourself", you, and 'your ilk', should NOT BE 'cavorting' WITH THE "peasants", correct?
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 6:08 amWHY did you only mention and talk about "women" and "mothers" doing as bad, sometimes worse, than some "fathers" and "men", but TOTALLY IGNORED that you, ALSO, do things that others DETEST, and HATE, ABSOLUTELY.
If your questions are an indictment against me, personally, then go ahead and ask your questions. Otherwise we're generalizing about the behaviors of ALL Western men and women.
ONCE AGAIN, as can be VERY CLEARLY SEEN, here, this one TOTALLY IGNORES what it does NOT WANT TO LOOK AT, and ADMIT.
What this one is DOING, here, is about the WORST, if NOT the WORST, thing ANY one can do ON EARTH.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 6:08 amSee, how 'these people' will NOT just ANSWER VERY SIMPLE CLARIFYING QUESTIONS posed, and asked, to them.
This one's response, here, ONCE AGAIN, did NOT relate to ANY of the three ACTUAL CLARIFYING QUESTIONS asked.
That's because your computerized Q&A is a daunting feat, AgeGPT. You go off on countless, infinite tangents. It's difficult for normal humans to keep up with you.
ONCE AGAIN, this human being is 'TRYING' it's HARDEST to 'TRY TO' 'justify' the Fact that it is NOT ABLE to JUST ANSWER VERY SIMPLE and EASY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 6:08 amWizard22 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 03, 2025 10:31 amGo ahead then, inform me.
Are you SAYING that you are NOT YET AWARE of the CONTRADICTION, and HYPOCRISY, here?
If you ANSWER with a 'Yes', then I WILL INFORM you.
Yes, go ahead then, inform me.
FINALLY.
What you are doing, here, is one of the WORST behaviors a human being can do, if not it IS THE WORST.
Now, doing 'this', while criticizing others for doing Wrong is INCONSISTENT, or CONTRADICTORY, and HYPOCRITICAL, at the least.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 6:08 amIs your opening post a so-called 'real argument', or, just what you believe is true and/or something else?
Feel free to ANSWER the ACTUAL QUESTION whenever you like.
Yes, it's a real argument.
Are you REALLY SURE?
your first line is just a question, only.
your second line is just what *you feel, only.
your third line is just another question, only.
your next sentence is just a question, only.
your following sentence is just your answer, to your previous question, only,
your next sentence is just your view and opinion, only.
your last sentence is just another one of *your feelings, only.
(*They are, actually, NOT 'your feelings', although you CLAIMED that they are. They are, in fact, your thoughts, only.)
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
It used to be common practice, in previous Centuries and Eras, in Europe, that potential Brides wanting to marry, had to be virgin and chaste.
WHO CARES?
A LOT of things HAPPENED and OCCURRED BACK in the 'olden days', when this was being written, and before, but, REALLY, WHO CARES?
Contrary to what you WANT, and DESIRE, ALL things KEEP CHANGING.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
And if they weren't, then they could not be married in the House of God.
In case you were UNAWARE, if there is A 'house' OF God, then it is the Universe, Itself. It CERTAINLY IS NOT some human being created little shelter.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
This practice was lost, and Western Civilization witnesses the results today.
So, THE REASON WHY the "western civilization" is 'the way' it is, in the days when this is being written, is BECAUSE "non virgin women" got 'married' in churches. Well according to "wizard22" anyway.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Eventually, its practiced became absorbed among the Highest classes, Royalty, Nobility, Monarchs...but the middle and lower classes, serfs and peasants, left it behind.
you could NOT be MORE AGAINST what is classed as God's LAW, here.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
"Protestantism" made it worse, because as seen in America today, they'll marry anybody for any reason: cats, dogs, homosexuals, you name it, they'll "marry" it. So it's a mockery of Religion, Western culture, and most other morals.
AGAIN, you have absolutely NO idea NOR clue as to what the word 'marry', here, even MEANS and is REFERRING TO, EXACTLY.
And, you WILL PROVE 'this' WHEN you are UNABLE TO ANSWER the QUESTION, 'What does the word 'marry' MEAN, and REFER TO, EXACTLY, in scripture literature?
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
It's the
exact opposite of Tradition, Religion, and Moral values. Today is upside-down world.
LOL If you ONLY KNEW "wizard22". If you ONLY KNEW.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 6:19 amWhat happens if a female body is born without a hymen? Can they NEVER get married?
Or is that an IMPOSSIBILITY, to you.
It would be up to the Church; I imagine they would say No. If girls break their hymen, not through sex, then they're still out and cannot be married.
you are SHOWING and PROVING WHY the so-called 'church/es' would be BEST BURNED DOWN, and REMOVED, FOREVER MORE.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 6:19 amAre "virgin guys" NOT talked about, nor discussed, in school, among "teenage boys and girls"?
If 'a guy is a virgin or not' is a topic of discussion, sometimes, among "teenage boys and/or girls", does this MEAN that those "boys and girls" did NOT learn, at 13 years of age, what you, supposedly, did?
Again, boys/men/males cannot be "virgins" because they don't have vaginas, and therefore don't have hymens.
ONCE AGAIN this one IS PROVING just HOW CLOSED it REALLY IS.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Males can be 'sexless', yes, innocent or ignorant about sex. And this is something that needs addressed. But a young male who had sex previously, can be married, yes.
LOL I am not even going to ask you WHY this is all right to you and the other way around is not.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Virginity is about females, not males.
OBVIOUSLY it IS, TO you.
But, you could not be MORE CLOSED, and MORE BLIND and STUPID, here.
Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 04, 2025 9:48 am
Gender/Sex is NOT "Equal". Males and females are not Equal.
'They' are, supposedly, NOT Equal, with a capital 'e', in regards to 'what', EXACTLY?