Markup /q/1255

Comment
>>1245
>Someone probably does. Someone who speaks greek probably does,
yeah someone like the scholars who argue that the verse is about married women, duh, lmao :^)
>it's just that ignorant people like you will parrot these linguistic arguments without actually knowing anything about the language OR linguistics in general
yeah too bad that's what you're doing, hence why your argument is as weak as it gets
>Talk about shifting the goal posts! Just went from "indulging in porn is OK" to "being straight is OK". Should I take that as a concession?
i'm not moving the goalposts at all. that's literally the implication of that verse. if it were to be interpreted the way you'd want it to be, we'd have to assume that being straight is a sin. you're being dense on purpose, you obviously realize at some level that im right.
>What about porn "stars" that cheat on their husband? 
in a way, not my problem. i dont think someone like that should be in a relationship, and those who are in realtionships are not in conventional relationships obviously, often the husband himself is involved with the industry.
you might argue that it's a sin but the sin is on their part, not mine.
>if you were really in the loop about the whole porn debate you'd know just how much abuse and coercion is going on in the industry of sin
there is abuse probably but just for the "low level" girls. the ones that are famous live the lives of a queen.
>Not to mention this whole debate is pointless, look at Christianity from the top down. A religion about suffering and self denial, about fasting and preparing oneself for departure. 
pretty sure the obsession with self denial and suffering is peculiarly orthodox, you dont really see it in catholicism and especially protestantism.