Thread 3983041

Shota for straight men. No /ss/ and no gay shota. Simple pictures of the beauty of boys and boyhood.

Previous: >>3976251

For anyone from the last thread, don't worry about the annoying spammer clogging up this thread.

Not your safe space.

>>3983069
You could always leave but you choose to stay. Funny how that works. You did this last thread and it failed miserably, too.

hahahahahaha you are a homo pedo in denial

cute boy kissus, anon

The fact that this dude is now violating/cm/ rules because he hates this thread this much will never not be funny. Just remember to report and ignore.

>>3983160
hot

Faggots can't stop losing lol.

A pure, wholesome boyhood is defined by its absence of impurities such as violence, trauma, or sexual dysfunction. A boy should be able to be himself, to express himself, to love as he does, without the need to prove his masculinity or heterosexuality. Unfortunately, men on the alpha-male, tradcon side and men on the gay, inclusive side fail in this regard by implying that boys who have feelings for other boys are closeted. By doing this, the boy loses his sense of self as well as potential friendships that could've been beautiful and intimate. The purpose of these past threads has been to discuss the nature of shota, the anthropology of boyhood and its connection to the straight male shotacon, as well as a path towards redeeming an art that has been corrupted with pornography and unnatural fantasies.

>>3983193
80% of the images you post were drawn by porn artists btw

>>3983202
I'm certain, but that unfortunately comes with the territory of this space and Japanese shotacon in general.

>>3983193
Jesus Christ you are mentally ill

>>3983234
Me? I think it's you that should take your meds.

>>3983193
You're the only anon in this godforsaken board who actually displays some originality of thought in their posts. No wonder all the other low-IQ braindead shotacons hate you.

>>3983234
>anon makes a fair and nuanced point about a contentious topic
>incoherent rage ensues
You're free to refute his points if you disagree. Using your brain once in a while would prove adequate to jolt you out of your intellectual stupor.

>>3983749
Appreciate the kind words, anon. I remember maybe about a year and half ago I had anons refer to me as "philosophy anon" when I used to frequent the main shota thread. Obviously that's changed since I've developed my personal ideas and have started writing more on the nature of male loneliness, anime, touch deprivation, etc. I still don't think I'm ready to tackle much more complex issues such as the lived body and how it relates to boyhood, but I feel I'm getting close (plus, it helps knowing I'm not alone in these sentiments from reading various authors and talking to other straight male shotacons both on here and on other websites).

To the anon who keeps posting gay shota, you can keep trying to derail the thread but it won't do anything.

>>3983750
The anti-homosexual sentiment is unnecessary

>>3983800
Why do you care what a stranger on the internet thinks of gays? This isn't your safe space and people are allowed to dislike or outright hate homosexuality if they want to.

>>3983802
Why do you care what a stranger on the internet thinks of homophobia? This isn't your safe space and people are allowed to dislike or outright hate homophobia if they want to.

>>3983802
Why the hatred anon?

>>3983800
Anon, the thread is called straight male shota...

Not

Your

Safe

>teenagers
>shota

Space

Imagine trying to object to 14 year old shotas after posting this >>3983074

>>3983804
You're allowed to have that opinion there is freedom of speech here, this place will still never be your safe space though.

>>3983830
I feel safe here though, so it is one of my many safe spaces

>>3983832
I'm glad you feel safe amongst your fellow straight men.

>>3983833
Tops are straight, and i've only ever done that, so yes i am straight. But thats not why i feel safe here

>>3983836
Do I make you feel safe? Awwww you're so sweet thank you buddy.

>>3983800
What did he say that was homophobic? If longing for an appreciation of a boyhood free from the constraints of adulthood, including sexuality, is homophobic, then consider me Fred Phelps

>>3983850
don't worry, it's a straight kiss... you know, just for practice haha... so you know how to kiss a girl, you know?

>>3983041 (OP)
OP here. If anyone wants actual, intellectual discussion regarding this topic, I'll be dropping my Discord down below. I welcome anyone - casual /cm/ user, gay, straight, fujo, whatever. As I mentioned before here >>3983193 the purpose of these threads was to open a discussion on the nature of shotacon and to see if it was possible to reclaim or redeem something that's been distorted. I think our shared history of narratives on boys around the world demonstrate a mutual love of boyhood that is very special, something that deserves to be protected - whether that's Tom Sawyer from Missouri or Mowgli in the jungles of India. Our boys were once cherished and celebrated not only in literature, but in art, myth, religious customs, and ceremonies. The boys were cherubs, gods, representations of life and death, of countries and peoples. Of ordinary lives and of lives that we wish we had.

Shotacon on the other hand is very reductive and embarrassing, there's no grand narrative or beauty enveloping shota - it's just nijikon (二次コン), or a two-dimensional complex tied to a perverted fetish, as Hiroki Azuma would put it. Again, it's one thing to find a boy beautiful, it's a completely separate issue to take advantage of that boy and to violate and abuse him. I want us to be better than Thomas Mann (as he violated the personalistic norm), but in order to do that we have to consider what brought us to /cm/ and why we find ourselves staying here. With that said, I'll end this post here.

Discord: strangehills0

>>3983041 (OP)
OP here. If anyone wants actual, intellectual discussion regarding this topic, I'll be dropping my Discord down below. I welcome anyone - casual /cm/ user, gay, straight, fujo, whatever. As I mentioned before here >>3983193 the purpose of these threads was to open a discussion on the nature of shotacon and to see if it was possible to reclaim or redeem something that's been distorted. I think our shared history of narratives on boys around the world demonstrate a mutual love of boyhood that is very special, something that deserves to be protected - whether that's Tom Sawyer from Missouri or Mowgli in the jungles of India. Our boys were once cherished and celebrated not only in literature, but in art, myth, religious customs, and ceremonies. The boys were cherubs, gods, representations of life and death, of countries and peoples. Of ordinary lives and of lives that we wish we had.

Shotacon on the other hand is very reductive and embarrassing, there's no grand narrative or beauty enveloping shota - it's just nijikon (二次コン), or a two-dimensional complex tied to a perverted fetish, as Hiroki Azuma would put it. Again, it's one thing to find a boy beautiful, it's a completely separate issue to take advantage of that boy and to violate and abuse him. I want us to be better than Thomas Mann (as he violated the personalistic norm), but in order to do that we have to consider what brought us to /cm/ and why we find ourselves staying here. With that said, I'll end this post here.

Discord: strangehills0

>>3983193
You cannot shame the demon.

It's my understanding that adult men who are fixated on children are either pedos or.... had very bad childhoods and therefore subconsciously seek to emotionally remedy this, Michael Jackson seems to have been an example of this.

Also, the preoccupation with and glamorization of "childhood" seems to be a mostly modern thing, I'm talking about actual children (not teenagers)

>>3983800
What is anti-homosexual about what he said exactly

>>3984121
This. I had a rough teenagehood because of rejection by my peers and I often end up fantasizing about this period due to an internal defense mechanism, living by procuration if you will. Cute drawings of teenage boys help my brain cope with this trauma in a way that nothing else can. This has nothing to do with sexual attraction. The human mind is weird and you can never tell why someone thinks the way they do.

>>3984235
this is exactly why i find shota art appealing. i spent my teenage years constantly being on guard and afraid of being ridiculed, demeaned and pushed around, pretending to like lame shit everyone else likes and pretending to hate stuff i like but everyone else thinks is lame, blending in with the crowd as much as possible to avoid abuse. shota and yaoi art changed it, made me realise boys and guys can be cute and gentle too and that i don't have to larp a tough guy douchebag, which i sucked at anyway. so what if i get called a faggot, it's better than becoming a bitter and resentful asshole for life. embracing my queerness was the most liberating experience of my life, more so even than ditching christianity, although the two were intrinsically connected. now when someone calls me a fag or laughs at me for being a wimp, i can only pity them for how their insecurity makes them miss out on good stuff in life.

>>3984240
You know being a "tough guy douchebag" or being gay aren't the only two choices you have right? You could've delved headfirst into Christianity and tried your best to be a good honest man that stood for something, instead you decided to ditch it and become a gay porn addict.......

>>3984241
it was the right choice for me. christianity was making me miserable, judgmental and self-repressive, definitely not a more compassionate and understanding person. i find this religion to be a spiritually vacuous way people take to feel virtuous and superior to others without putting out any real work. just kneel, pray at a piece of wood, obey, let a clique of hysterical virgins and pedos control your life and hope there's something better out there for you after you die. what a sad way to waste your life. i'd rather be a massive faggot, kiss other guys and have sex instead of repressing what i am.

>>3984243
You don't have to go to church or listen to a priest to be Christian. Christianity is about your own personal relationship with God and holding yourself accountable even if the wider world at large mistreats and outcast you. Sucking cock and being gay might feel good to you in the moment but later in life will you be able to look yourself in the mirror and say that you're proud you spent your years getting barebacked and having "fun" instead of striving for some deeper meaning to your life? When you were a young boy what type of man did you dream of being when you were older? Somehow I doubt the younger, innocent version of yourself would have wanted you to go down this path in life.

>>3983069
>>3983097
>>3983098
>>3983100
>>3983057
>>3983103
>>3983125
>>3983137
>>3983809
You lost faggot

>>3984257
I only post in this thread when you invade the real one. Which you've just done again. Because getting bored of talking to yourself is apparently what winning looks like.

>>3984255
i find deeper meaning contemplating nature and art, cultivating my knowledge and talents, developing as a person, being creative, enjoying wholesome food, spending time with friends and family, having fun, listening to music, playing instruments, singing my soul out, sometimes introspecting with the aid of psychedelics. i feel more in touch with life, love and the universe than i ever was when worshiping this made up god. this world and this life are the only ones we're getting and i don't want to miss out on the little beauty and joy it offers more than i already did.
the teen version of me would be horrified by what he's going to become but it doesn't really matter. i'm saddened by what he was and horrified by what he was going to become if he stayed on that path.
i'm glad christianity works for you, for a while i used to think it's the right way for me too but in hindsight it's very obvious it was going to lead me to a place of sadness and self-hate had i stayed on that path.

>>3984260
Do you really think there's only one person making fun of you? lol you need to take your meds retard.

>>3984268
That's good and all but once the cookie cutter drugs and good vibes lose their luster what will be the next cope? A man can only sustain himself on warm and fuzzy feelings for so long before the shallowness wears him down and leaves him empty. You and I both know you could amount to so much more than a cocksucker if you actually put your mind to it.

>>3984241
>good honest man
>worshiping a guy on a torture device that is meant to lure people into worshiping a sexual mutilator desert demon

>>3984278
i am more than that, despite your tendency to see gays solely as shallow pleasure-seekers. sucking dick and taking it up the ass are just one of many things i do with my life.
and what's your way to cope with pain and existential dread? deluding yourself that there's a god out there listening to your prayers and sometimes granting you wishes? does it really chase away the emptiness and fear of death when you're alone? does it really give you purpose? because i've seen deeply religious people absolutely frozen in terror and scrambling as they realise their time is running out soon. all the decades of worship and devotion did very little to give them peace and serenity in their final moments. you'd expect them to be happy to finally meet their maker and loved ones who passed on before them, yet all i saw was dread and clinging on to this supposedly meaningless earthly existence.
i find it curious how you're going out of your way to convince me i should somehow either stop being attracted to men or to repress it with your religion. believe me, anon, i tried. i've been desperately trying to believe in god and find meaning in scripture and rituals, none of it worked. i still felt lost and alone, afraid of death and crushed by lack of purpose and meaning. i still feel these feelings sometimes, i just accepted them as part of life and stopped trying to chase them away with prayer. i sought out my own path and reinvented my spirituality on my own terms. i'm still seeking, still making mistakes, still failing and still occasionally feeling miserable, but at least i'm finally getting somewhere with it and getting genuine improvements in my well-being.
honestly, it kinda feels to me like you're not as secure in your own belief system as you make it out to be. seems to me you're trying to convince yourself by arguing against me. i've been there too, trying to convert people to christianity as my own faith was failing me.

>it was a christcvck the whole time
The characteristic mixture of vacuous self-righteousness and abject inferiority should have made it obvious.

I pray the Buddhas give me the strength to have benevolence in my heart while disposing of them

>>3984278
Did they diddle your child anus in the conversion camp, rightoid? I bet they peed on your butt and made you hold it in until you couldn't anymore and then ripped wet farts into your tiny mouth. I'm genuinely sorry that happened to you

>>3984285
OP here, >>3984241 is a different anon.
Anyways, I'm understanding of your background and where you came from. You mentioned feeling out of place with your masculinity when you mentioned how in your teenage years you had to be very performative; "pretending to like lame shit... blending in with the crowd as much as possible to avoid abuse." My upbringing and teen year were much the same ways even though I'm a straight Christian male. I can't stand sportsball, I can't be near grease monkeys, I'm very soft-spoken and the opposite of a womanizer. I've been an outcast for a very long time and my only friends were other nerds and outcasts like me. It wasn't until only very recently that a peer brought up that I might be on the spectrum, so that's a possibility as to why I felt I didn't belong to any one particular group very well. All that said, I think people are quick to abandon ship and jump from one category to another. Again, it's understandable and I sympathize strongly with how you came to your conclusion, it makes sense logically - so understand that I'm not making a judgment on your decisions, just trying to relate. Regardless, it may be considered socially unacceptable or strange for a man like myself to be fixated on cute boys (while reconciling his heterosexuality), but that's a _them_ problem, not a _me_ problem. If I'm going to be alone, then I'm fine being alone with my interests and thoughts on this subject rather than having what society deem for me what is acceptable or not.

>>3984290
are you actually attracted to women though? because if not, that's not really being straight, more like asexual/aromantic.

>>3984292
I've gone on dates with my female co-workers before, but otherwise I'm comfortable being single. It's the best option right now regarding the current state of the economy and our lack of attention and care to childhood. Most people unfortunately only reproduce because of how strong their libido is at the moment, letting it control their desires and subconscious to the point that it takes over and they're able to say things like: "Oh, yeah, you were totally planned and everything, son." I'm past the age that most girls would find me attractive anyway, and right now I'm just concerned with trying to get by and be content with what the good things I do have.

>>3984290
>they're both cuckservative religion tards
You told me you weren't when I pointed out that your parents abused you with religion and that you most likely went to a conversion camp.
You're all such lying sacks of self-loathing shit.

>>3984326
You were talking to a different anon.

>>3984241
Let's not even start with this

>>3984294
not this image with the gigantic feet again, the size of his entire torso

>>3984346
I don't agree with everything he says, but he's correct in that a lot of young men are conditioned to believe that there are only a few choices when it comes to being a man. This is part of the reason Robert Bly wrote "Iron John" because he was trying to address a very real issue when it comes to the crisis of masculinity. We've boxed or limited ourselves into believing that there are a few, 'correct' ways to be a man - and any seeming failure on that performance deems one as not being a 'real man,' or worse, 'in the closet.' I think all the sperging out at this thread's existence proves my point. I think the fact that I have an anon that refers to me as an "it" and creates an elaborate conspiracy theory that I'm somehow working with the jannies speak volumes. Again, I already made in invitation, so if you personally wanna dish it out with me, you're all free to join.

>>3984341
both of you claimed to be Christian though

>>3984418
Fair enough. I'd like to see you make a case as to why Christian men or heterosexual, secular men can't find beauty in the boy.

Fun thread, some questions:
Are kisses (too) gay? Seems not connected to homosexuality irl. Is this an childhood adventure type of thread? Because as much as I like cuddly stuff i enjoy that more. What's the reason? For me nostalgia I guess about a time we were free to explore all kind of alien worlds the town and surroundings had to offer until the sun went down.

>>3984468
>Are kisses (too) gay? Seems not connected to homosexuality irl.
No, kisses don't have any connection to sexuality, even if the kiss is between two boys. As I mentioned in previous /sms/ threads, acts of affection such as these (whether we call them "tie signs" or use the Japanese portmanteau "skinship") are only indicative of how close one person is to another. Do we call a kiss between a mother and son on the lips indicative or incest? A young girl and her pet dog bestiality? Of course not, nor did we ever consider a kiss between two boys an indication of the "sin of Sodom."
From Jaeger:
>it is possible for medieval writers to say... that a king loved his courtier vehemently, embraced him with the flames of intimate love, kissed him, slept with him, shared the same clothes, and ate from the same dish... and none of these formulations was received as an indication of an illicit erotic attachment.

>>3984468
(Cont.)
>Is this an childhood adventure type of thread? Because as much as I like cuddly stuff i enjoy that more. What's the reason? For me nostalgia I guess about a time we were free to explore all kind of alien worlds the town and surroundings had to offer until the sun went down.
Yes and then some. Yes in that these threads are here to discuss and talk about what boyhood means to us, boyhood customs, rituals, and experiences unique to boys. That would include boyhood adventures such as the courageousness of boys (scouting, risk-taking, sports), the activities of boys, and the natural attitudes and beliefs of our boys. Myself, I want to redeem "shotacon" to be something more than just a fixation or obsession based on some perverse or sexual desire. I look at the art of Pierre Joubert, the writings of authors such as Rudyard Kipling - and I see compassion and love for the boyhoods they had, the boys they raised, and the boys they wanted to inspire.

this retarded psued keeps posting ugly mutated freaks

>>3984495
You're free to contribute (or not, I don't care).

>>3984285
Lets be honest the real reason why you "ditched" Christianity is because you couldn't reconcile it with your homosexual urges. Just because something might feel good doesn't make it the right thing to do. You talk as if you poured your heart and soul into Christ and He failed you, but in reality you failed to practice the most basic Christian tenet: deny yourself. You gave up all your supposed beliefs to chase a fleeting sexual fantasy. It's tragic really and I hope one day you reflect on your actions and come to the truth yourself instead of me "converting" you. I know you're not dumb and have it within yourself to change.

>>3984504
You guys are so full of shit and miserable.

>>3984504
you really believe one can choose not to be gay?

>>3984468
>Are kisses (too) gay?
Kissing shotas is the most straight thing in the world. Every man should kiss a shota at least once a day to ensure the proper emotional development of the boy.

>>3984255
>later in life will you be able to look yourself in the mirror and say that you're proud you spent your years getting barebacked and having "fun" instead of striving for some deeper meaning to your life?
Fun is a part of life. It's a necessary part of life. It's an important part of fully enjoying God's creation. Letting yourself be consumed by shallow pleasures is bad, yes, but fully denying your being in a misguided attempt to appeal to a projected ideal is just as bad. God did not make us blank slates - he made us animals, with bodies and minds - he made us with a nature, one not to be expunged in favor of platonic holiness, but reconciled with his will.

>Sucking cock and being gay might feel good to you in the moment but later in life will you be able to look yourself in the mirror
Out of curiosity, what do you say to men who are trying to pick up the broken pieces of their spirituality who still find themselves drawn to the affections of the same sex? Are you unable to reconcile the possibility of a gay relationship serving God's will in the same way a straight one might? I would hope not - you seem far too thoughtful to have such an obvious blind spot -but perhaps the sort of gays who tend to approach you have given you a bad experience.

I've long tried to reconcile the path that my life took with what God's will would have been, since I was faithful and earnest in my teen years and often asked to be made a vessel for his will. Whether my faith wavered or not, it seemed clear to me that God was not interested in molding me into the shape of a man who appeals to women more than men. Indeed, he seems to have gone out of his way to send me down strange paths. I think God's will needs people like that. None of it made sense to me until I found ways to open my mind and see him in the mysteries all around me. And with my faith renewed in recent years, I have not tired of reminding him that I am here when he needs me, and that he can call when he does.

>>3984559
>Out of curiosity, what do you say to men who are trying to pick up the broken pieces of their spirituality who still find themselves drawn to the affections of the same sex? Are you unable to reconcile the possibility of a gay relationship serving God's will in the same way a straight one might?
There's no way a gay relationship could be reconciled with God's plan because it goes against His divine order of things. It's an unnatural and disordered sexuality. For a gay man to be redeemed, he must give up his own sexuality and sexual past and live like the saints - that is, to be celibate. Not everyone was meant to be in a relationship, marry, or procreate. And if you still struggle with temptation, then first you must flee that immorality and when you do stumble, you seek forgiveness ("go and sin no more.").
>it seemed clear to me that God was not interested in molding me into the shape of a man who appeals to women more than men.
Again, there are a multitude of reasons as to why people become who they are in regards to sexuality (genes, environment, trauma, exposure to pornography, etc). Reducing it to "God was not interested" in you honestly sounds very selfish. What makes your sins so unique that you think God wouldn't care? Could it be that you can't hear Him because you choose not to?
>I have not tired of reminding him that I am here when he needs me, and that he can call when he does.
So this is just bad theology. You're making it seem as if God needs you. It's the opposite, anon. I don't know where you are spiritually speaking, but this line of thinking is more in-line with the neognostics than any of the orthodox theologians. If you want to be truly repentant, you would deny yourself and recognize the error of your ways and find a way to both reconcile and make reparations for your behavior. But your post sadly says otherwise.

>>3984575
I think we're having some communication glitches due to coming from different theological backgrounds. When I say "when God needs me," I don't mean that in the sense of God being helpless without me or people like me - I'm coming from a theological tradition going back at least as far as the Old Testament of God using human servants to enact his will. Not just the Prophets, but David, Paul, John the Baptist, and Abraham. God could, presumably, enact his will with a mere thought, but he chooses instead to make agents of whose who make themselves available to him.

>There's no way a gay relationship could be reconciled with God's plan because it goes against His divine order of things. It's an unnatural and disordered sexuality.
Saying that something is unnatural is not a good way to argue God's will. You've opened yourself up to the kind of lazy rebuttal that characterized the atheist movement in the early 2000s:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals
I'm disappointed in you. Someone who has put this much effort into trying to speak God's words to those who will not hear should be able to do better than that. And you have the arrogance to speak as if you know what God's plan is for creation, something that theologians who have been studying and meditating for thousands of years haven't yet been able to grasp.

>this line of thinking is more in-line with the neognostics than any of the orthodox theologians
I don't follow your reasoning. Gnosticism is based on the premise that God is mad and his creation is wicked and corrupt; that the creation is evil and harmony with it is intolerable; that the only recourse is to transcend beyond it, rejecting one's nature for the pursuit of purity. That sounds a lot more like what you're saying than what I'm saying. You need to be cautious about how you interpret the words of those who came before you, anon - a lot of those orthodox theologians were themselves influenced by the Gnostics.

>>3984575
>Could it be that you can't hear Him because you choose not to?
I'm not going to get angry at you, because you can't have known what my situation was prior to this interaction, but I am going to express my profound disappointment in you for how presumptuous you're being here. You were not there for the long nights where I could not sleep because I was on the floor begging, pleading, crying out to hear his voice. I would have done ANYTHING he told me to. Even when I lost my faith, it was not in God, but in his church, and the people in my life who were tasked with leading me to him.
>For no good tree bears bad fruit, nor again does a bad tree bear good fruit.

>What makes your sins so unique that you think God wouldn't care?
>And Jesus responded to the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath, or not?" [...] And he said to them, "Which of you, having a son or an ox that has fallen into a well on the Sabbath day, will not immediately pull him out?"
Arrogance. Arrogance! You speak of God's law but make no effort to understand why they were written as they were. You speak contemptuously of the nature of man - God's creation - as though it must be transcended, like the hypocrites do. Apart from anything else, that is not how human psychology works - when you pull against your nature, it will tend to spring back at you. You will never achieve holiness by trying to overcome what God made of you. That is why I used the word "reconcile" to describe what it is to try to bring yourself to harmony with God's will. Leaving aside the unsettled theological question of whether homosexuality is intrinsically sinful, it has made me more capable of doing God's will in the lives of others - those who need not to be judged, but to be loved - than resisting it ever did. That is why I believe it is God's will for me: because I have listened and had faith.

>>3984586
That was a different anon that last replied to you but what I will say is you seem to think you're the only Christian that's ever had to wrestle with sexual immorality which obviously isn't true. There have been plenty of Christians before us that managed to overcome homosexual desires in order to wholeheartedly pursue God. As for the nature of man, we are all sinners at heart and Christ says multiple times in the Bible that we are to deny ourselves and take up our crosses in order to follow Him. I really don't get how you could misinterpret that unless you're actively looking for excuses to continue living in sin. I don't believe being a sodomite is your true nature, I believe it's a sexual perversion of what you truly desire in life, which is to love and be loved by other men. It is a lie of the modern world that platonic relationships can't be just as deep and fulfilling if not more so than sexual ones. I truthfully do love you and hope you repent, you seem like you need a Christian brother to help guide you back on the right path and I'm sure there are multiple Christian men in this thread including myself willing to help you if you are willing to be helped.

>>3984557
look at him receive that boy-kissu :3

religion is child-abuse. you used to be persecuted for good reason.

>>3984596
>you seem to think you're the only Christian that's ever had to wrestle with sexual immorality
No, obviously not. Sex is a part of life, and so the morality of how to engage in it responsibly is something that everyone struggles with. However, I am also not the first Christian to have reconciled his sexuality with God's will, which is why I'm perplexed that so many people seem to think that this is impossible. Sex is not some dirty thing that God makes a special exemption to allow us to have under very specific circumstances - it's a part of his design, something that serves a number of different important functions in human and animal life, and something that contributes to the overall beauty of his great work.

>we are all sinners at heart
We are also all good by nature. Or, at least, those of us who aren't afflicted by a specific manifestation of debilitating trauma or severe defect.

>I believe it's a sexual perversion of what you truly desire in life, which is to love and be loved by other men.
I do not want for the love of other men. I have more than enough friends to satisfy my predisposition. What I wanted in my youth was for the love I gave to women to be reciprocated by them, which I did not get. Indeed, the only people who have ever expressed romantic interest in me are men. We can argue over how to interpret that input and how it fits into God's plan, but as I said before I have been able to do good in the lives of people who so-called traditionalists like you (the modern conception of what is "traditional" has been severely distorted) can not, because they can not offer to those people what I can.

By interrogating the traditions you're defending without question, I have come to understand them better, and make more informed decisions about how to interpret them. This has allowed me to compensate for the corruption of the church and the holy texts I was taught to rely on with real spiritual insight instead of hollow posturing and compliance.

>>3984616
How can you say humans are good by nature when you just confessed to being a prison gay incel? Being unable to secure a girlfriend is not an excuse to become a sodomite. All i've really seen from you is excuses and copes for sinful behaviour. The Bible says point-blank that neither homosexuals nor the effeminate will inherit the kingdom of God, you have to make a definitive choice to either continue following your deceitful heart or to repent and follow God, no man can serve two masters. I promise you that you can overcome your urges no matter how strong they are, you just need to resolve to do it without anymore lame excuses about how no girl ever loving you made you gay.

>>3984619
>How can you say humans are good by nature when you just confessed to being a prison gay incel?
Well, first of all, that's not what I said. Secondly, those two things are not mutually exclusive. Not even if we assume that not getting romantic attention when I want it is a moral failing on humanity.

What you are doing right now is precisely equivalent to those anons who project homosexual intent onto you because of what you post in this thread. Stop it.

>The Bible says point-blank that neither homosexuals nor the effeminate will inherit the kingdom of God
It says that nowhere. I've checked. There are a number of passages which explicitly or tacitly place an injunction against homosexual behavior, but the context of those passages have been lost to history. We know why the Old Testament laws forbid eating pork and shellfish, but we don't know why they forbade consensual sex between males, and this is never clarified to be explicitly sinful at any point later in the Bible, especially when Jesus comes along and starts talking about the Kingdom of Heaven. If such a passage existed I would have heard about it, especially from my parents and everyone else who was interested in telling me that male sexuality is dirty and sinful.

I must again express my profound disappointment in you. I thought you had put actual thought into your beliefs, but all you've said is basically "someone told me that this is what the Bible says, therefore this is true." The correct interpretation of the Bible is not nearly as clear as you think it is - you were just taught to interpret it a specific way and that anyone who disagreed was living in sin and could not be trusted. If you had ever interrogated your beliefs honestly you would be better able to defend and discuss the nuances of them than by simply asserting them to be true and spewing a bunch of "repent, sinner" bullshit. I suppose I'll have to look elsewhere to find someone able to have a proper conversation about this.

>>3984638
First corinthians chapter 6 doesn't exist? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand what it is meant by homosexuals not inheriting the kingdom of God how much more obvious could it get? God also says in The Old Testamant that homosexuality is an abomination(notice He doesn't call eating pork or shellfish an abomination). This is a pretty clear-cut case my friend, I don't understand how you can't look at the pages of the Bible and read in plain english that sodomy is a flat out abomination and still try and defend being a practicing homosexual, are you just one of those guys that hates Paul and thinks that just because Jesus doesn't explicitly say being gay is bad that somehow justifies sodomy? Your whole line of reasoning is silly and you're just grasping at straws trying to find excuses to justify you trying to live out your weird sexual fantasies.

>>3984647
Why are so many of you so quick to jump to accusations of hatred? I am a Christian, sir, despite your protestations; it is not in my nature to harbor hatred, especially not for other people.

OK, fine, you caught me; I had not read that passage since switching to a different Bible translation. I didn't see, and mysteriously no other person ever pointed out to me, the letter that Paul wrote in which he stated his opinion that homosexuals would not inherit the Kingdom of God. I also failed to note any passage in which God names Paul as an authority on the law equal to Jesus.

I do hope that you're this quick to condemn people who practice circumcision, since he condemned that with much more vigor than he ever did homosexuality. Indeed, he declared that circumcision would render Jesus's sacrifice invalid. Have fun arguing that point with people who claim to hold the literal explicit text of the Bible as sacred without consideration of inconveniences like historical context.

Anyway, it's obvious you're not interested in discussing actual theology or philosophy and instead just intend to quote the Bible at me like I haven't heard it all before. You're welcome to ask questions of me, but I'm not interested in being lectured at, especially in not such a transparent and shallow way. Take care of yourself, anon, and I hope that your journey brings you joy and meaning as mine has. God bless.

>>3984654
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
>Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

Physical circumcision has no influence on one's salvation - thus, whether one was circumcised or not as a child has zero bearing on whether they will be saved or not. Being an active homosexual and refusing to deny that, continuing to actively participate in sin - will, indeed, send oneself to eternal damnation.

>>3984655
I don't care about the catechism of the Catholic Church. It is one of the most corrupt churches in history and has failed to do anything to redeem itself.

>Physical circumcision has no influence on one's salvation
Hebrews 5:2-4:
>Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obliged to keep the whole law. You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.

You are doing nothing but picking and choosing to which authority you will defer when pressed for answers. You can not provide a meaningful answer of your own to these questions. I wait with bated breath for you to prove me wrong.

>>3984659
Anon... that's not what Hebrews 5:2-4 says

>>3984664
Apologies, I misread the name of the book as I was flipping through. That quote was from Galatians 5:2-4. My point still stands: Satan can quote scripture too.

>>3984666
Regardless, you're taking it out of context. Circumcision prior was a part of the Abrahamic law, but now that the Gentiles (non-Jews) were grafted in, circumcision was no longer a requirement. The Chosen People are now Christians, not Jews (thus, the death of Christ, the establishment of the New Covenant at Jesus' last supper, and Peter being the first pope). This means circumcision is abolished. Gone. Because Christianity and the gospel are for everyone, regardless where you come from. Judaizing - or forcing someone to take up the Abrahamic laws or believe and practice as the Jews do, was something Paul had to correct Peter on several times in the New Testament, something you conveniently ignored in your attempt to believe that Paul was merely writing his "opinion" rather than writing the divine revelation he received from God. Again, this also applies to the condemnation of homosexuality. If you choose to be an Episcopalian instead, supporting abortion and homosexuality, you're only putting your salvation and the lives of others at risk.

wait why are you discussing circumcision and christianity i thought i was in /cm/ nit /his/

>>3984669
This is /his/ now

>>3984668
You also conveniently ignored the fact that the church was in disagreement about many aspects of the law at the time of Paul, which is why he and Peter were frequently in conflict. There's that context of which you were speaking. I suppose the Apostle Peter to which you are referring can not be said to have had divine revelation like Paul, unless you are, as I suggested, implying that Paul's authority is greater than that of the Apostles. Again, you are doing nothing but cherrypicking, and I'm going to be presumptuous and say it's because Paul was determined to be the ultimate authority on Christian doctrine by the Catholics, due in large part to his advocacy for the Gentiles as recipients of salvation.

>>3984672
Tell me you haven't seen a Catholic icon without telling me you haven't seen a Catholic icon. Do I have to tell you to google "SS. Peter and Paul" to force you to understand that Peter and Paul are co-equals? Are you going to argue against another strawman that you've built up in your mind? Every restorationist such as yourself is his own pope. But go ahead and tell me what I allegedly believe and how wrong I am and how "well, acksually the bible never strictly forbade gay marriage, I read John Boswell!"

>>3984671
but...but...i JUST left /his/ to spend a good time in /cm/!

>>3984674
>A-chan: Peter and Paul were often in conflict.
>B-chan: Peter and Paul were often in conflict.
>A-chan: Oh my god, are you stupid, why are you saying that Peter and Paul were often in conflict when they were co-equals!?

>>3984675
Simple, we merge the boards! /hiscm/

>>3984655
>They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life.
breeder shit for creating more slaves and suffering.

>>3984606
He was really flustered because it was his first kiss.

I thought most shotafags were bi or straight why are you defending homosexuality

Feel free to post AI or non-anime images.