Thanks for the comments correcting “the Ukraine” to just “Ukraine”. I actually had it in my head to not say that when filming, but it must’ve slipped out since that’s the way I normally hear it. Thanks though!
So strange .. I must research more about Ukraine.. However... I live near Sault Ste. Marie, MI, and EVERYONE here calls it, "the Soo." We go shopping in, "the Soo," we eat out in, "the Soo," etc. If you said to a Yooper, "I am going to Soo," we would laugh at you. (In a friendly Yooper way, lol) But, you can go to Sault Ste. Marie, and that is fine. My point, I guess, is people are funny about names of where they come from! 😉
Oh, wasn't aware of that either, but the explanation I read after a quick search makes perfect sense. @@blueeyedchippewa8271 Hmm is that a abbreviation/nickname then, though?
They simply cannot handle not having control over people’s sex lives. “Don’t have sex before marriage”. “Ok, we’re married now so we can do anything!” “NOT SO FAST!” 😂
Some Catholics are so strict that sex is sorry for reproduction. Having sex for pleasure even in a marriage isn't allowed. Of course who the heck actually does that but it is a thing...
It's really unfortunate how necessary it is to put this in bold and italics with multiple underlines. Though their reasoning is off, the fact that the subjects of the video thought they had to say something about it is very telling.
It is a really low bar for those that see consent as an inherent human right (regardless of being in a marriage), but it is common in an Evangelical community to say that sex is an inherent right of the man - that consent does not even exist in a marriage .
I live in a state (West Virginia) where the legal definition of rape specifically excluded marital rape until LAST MONTH (March 2024.) It may be a low bar, but it's one that at least 9 WV state senators (Sens. Mike Azinger, R-Wood [County]; Mark Hunt, R-Kanawha; Patrick Martin, R-Lewis; Mark Maynard, R-Wayne; Amy Grady, R-Mason; Glenn Jeffries, R-Putnam; Robert Karnes, R-Randolph; Rollan Roberts, R-Raleigh; and Eric Tarr, R-Putnam) couldn't clear. Under the old law, you couldn't be convicted of third degree sexual assault (forcible touching of buttocks, breasts, or genitalia) against your spouse even if you were separated!
@@burke615Good grief! That is wild and terrifying! I can't get my head around having such low empathy to think that keeping that out of sexual assault laws is a reasonable position to take.
@@lizzybeary For real though. I was taught the act of thinking of someone else in a sexual context was equal to adultery because "if your heart desires it then you aren't actually faithful to her. And that itself is adultery. And as all sins are equal, that is as bad as if you had literally cheated on her with someone else." Luckily I never fully believed that doctrine or else I might have actually cheated on her because "Well, if it's all equal and I'll have to go to hell / beg for forgiveness anyway, I might aswell commit to it and have fun while I'm at it."
As a girl (now a woman) i was taught to not think about s 3x EVEN AFTER marriage "because your husband will want it enough for the both of you, and ge will tell you when its time to do it". Having physical urges ever was wrong, looking forward to it was wrong, asking for it was wrong, because you couldnt ever defile yourself--you had to let your husband do that EVEN FURTHER, once we were doing the act, we were not to worry about seeking our own pleasure. Only hubby needs to peak for a baby to be made. Let him worry about his own pleasure. Dont even think about your husband. Use the act to glorify God, its not about you and your husband. Just babies, babies, babies and making it an act of worship to God.....somehow You are just the tool in the middle between man and Gods use Dont think, dont think, dont think, dont think, dont think, dont EVER thing young lady!
@@lizzybearyAs a girl (now a woman) i was taught to not think about s 3x EVEN AFTER marriage "because your husband will want it enough for the both of you, and ge will tell you when its time to do it". Having physical urges ever was wrong, looking forward to it was wrong, asking for it was wrong, because you couldnt ever defile yourself--you had to let your husband do that EVEN FURTHER, once we were doing the act, we were not to worry about seeking our own pleasure. Only hubby needs to peak for a baby to be made. Let him worry about his own pleasure. Dont even think about your husband. Use the act to glorify God, its not about you and your husband. Just babies, babies, babies and making it an act of worship to God.....somehow You are just the tool in the middle between man and Gods use Dont think, dont think, dont think, dont think, dont think, dont EVER thing young lady!
Solomon was walking round his palace one day when he came across a very beautiful woman. "Who are you?" he said. "I am your wife" she said "Oh really?" he replied "Yes" she said "I am wife number 256. Don't you remember that really great night you had two and a half years ago?"
@@MagickP00dleAs a swinger who has met all kinds of swingers from all around the world I can say it is not a stereotype I have ever run across. The only stereotype I consistently heard pertained to "key party" swingers and Air Force swingers.
My pastor one time was speaking of someones 2nd wife in a bible story and he said, "Well, it was ok back then," and just continued with the story. I was starting to come out of Christianity and was like, What???
Tbf, that’s also their response when you ask about the Bible’s slavery rules. “If you beat your slave and they recover in 2 days it’s ok because they’re your property. It’s only bad if they die within 2 days of the beating.” - the Bible “Oh, that was the Old Testament, Jesus added new rules to the old rules”
Dr McClellan always insists that there is no "god of the bible" or "sex laws of the bible", every supposed literalist who just "follows the bible" has to pick and choose which verses they will follow and which they will ignore. And that's ok, that is what you are supposed to do, just don't go around pretending that your views are supported by the bible. The bible supports quite a lot of random and contradictory sh1t.
@@whysocurious7366 the most annoying part of that "justification" is that the "new rules" that Jesus added were "slaves, obey your masters, even the bad ones." Nothing about changing the framework at all! 🤦♂ PS Oh, and Drew mentioned something like that, at 28:19. :-)
We were definitely taught in IBLP/IFB churches that any fantasy -- even about our own spouses -- was sinful. It took me so long to get past this. I have a very active imagination and as a new wife (multiple decades ago now), I would cry when I broke the rules. I also have impulsive ADHD that was undiagnosed and untreated back then. The ADHD made following their long list of rules even harder. One day, my husband got tired of their list of rules and the lack of actual sex education we had recieved and went to the public library and brought home every book he could find on sex. Best decision ever even though I was terrified someone was going to find out. Most of the stuff we were taught in high control religion was not just unhelpful. It was outright damaging. All these years later we have a healthy, happy marriage in spite of the cult and certainly not because of it.
It's amazing that you both were able to learn and explore together in such a healthy way. I'm so happy for you! I love seeing happy, healthy couples. Especially men who are good to their partner.
Well done. You broke free from your shackles and are even more healthy now despite all the warnings they gave about sin and evil….. I am a reformed religious person and I recall as a child being worried that my thoughts were sinful. Can you imagine? Literal “thought police” from the dystopian novel 1984. Horrible. I cannot imagine any benevolent god doing that. But if a religion can control your thoughts, how much more power do they need? Controlling people’s consenting sex lives is bad enough, but thought police? Yikes. Glad I left all that behind. I feel more healthy not always worry about sin. Now, I don’t believe in sin as sin is a wrong we commit to god. But chow could we harm a god? And I don’t be lion gods, so there is that LOL
As a girl (now a woman) i was taught to not think about s 3x EVEN AFTER marriage "because your husband will want it enough for the both of you, and ge will tell you when its time to do it". Having physical urges ever was wrong, looking forward to it was wrong, asking for it was wrong, because you couldnt ever defile yourself--you had to let your husband do that EVEN FURTHER, once we were doing the act, we were not to worry about seeking our own pleasure. Only hubby needs to peak for a baby to be made. Let him worry about his own pleasure. Dont even think about your husband. Use the act to glorify God, its not about you and your husband. Just babies, babies, babies and making it an act of worship to God.....somehow You are just the tool in the middle between man and Gods use Dont think, dont think, dont think, dont think, dont think, dont EVER thing young lady!
Oh. Good point. And a few of our fine Bible Belt states would like to preserve a legal expansion of that for violence and rape. Y'know, God's will and shit.
Weird question…but has any bible thumper actually defined “demon” you know outside of implications that they are bad ghosts that range from childish to evil
My theory on why some evangelicals are so fixated on sex is because the person saying whatever it is projecting their own desires onto others. Because they can't act on the desire then they shame others who do but if they could do that thing without being caught or ever be shown to have done so I'm pretty sure they would do so.
this totally checks out. they have a history of demonizing or shaming things they can't have (due to accessibility, affordability, etc.) or things they "aren't supposed" to do, so they make these things bad. it's like they're also trying to convince themselves.
@@kadenoneill7227 exactly, how many pastors and priests have been caught doing the same thing they railed about. How many homophobic people have later been found in a gay situation? It's projection, which makes me wonder, which on of them wants the three way? No judgement here, only curious.
definitely. people only preach out of self centredness. I can see that with my family, they would love to do crazy things (not just sex, drugs etc) but its wrong. so they have a high envy/ jealousy streak in them
Probably not really. Most views are based on moral foundations and people have differing moral foundations. Religious conservatives typically rate very high in the purity index. I think it's safe to assume their being honest and are just very rigid in their ideological understanding morally and happen to base it off religion.
i am still suffering the consequences of Christianity in my approach to romantic interests, sexual discussion, setting any sort of intimate boundary, my ability to self-disclose and self-love, and so much more. i cannot emphasize enough how much your channel has helped me in my journey through deconstructing.
You can let go of this unhealthy view on love, sex and sexuality. We believe in you ❤ Always remember: If it feels good to everyone involved, then you're doing it right. Sin is not good for anything but feeling naughty, and you deserve to love yourself, your body and what you do with it.
A quote from a religious studies exam in the UK said. The Muslim man has relations with many wives. This is called polygamy. The Christian man has relations with just one wife. This is called monotony.
I like the part where you say “Change their order to: 1) is there consent? 2) is this beneficial? And…. just ditch the bible part!” Could not agree more!!
Also, thanks for talking some nuance about porn consumption - as an artist who very much enjoys written and drawn pornography, i get tired of secular people harping on the potential harms to actors while ignoring the existence of ethically produced porn and porn that doesn't involve actors - part of what i love about drawn porn in online subcultures is knowing the artist almost certainly had a blast making it, too
I also think the extra abstraction of non-filmed pornographic materials helps cement in the mind that this is a fantasy to be enjoyed and not an instruction manual to be followed, but my deep thoughts on the relationship of fantasy and impossibility to sexuality and kink get wordy quick so i'll leave it at that
My better half and I were adult entertainers who enjoyed all types of performing. One gig that still stands out in my memories was a fundraiser that featured entertainers as models for all manner of artists. Some of the drawings and paintings of my better half were stunning. The artists were an amazingly diverse bunch and all were very respectful. I still grin when I think of it, and we treasure the drawing one artist gave us.
“I get tired of secular people harping on the potential harm to actors” But it’s always going to be a good thing to point out the very real and damaging effects of the industry. Many actors have been coerced, SA’d, or sex trafficked. Your artwork may be an alternative but the harm caused by the industry still needs talked about because a lot of people are still unaware
@@amandastewart1358 You are painting the industry with a very broad brush. There are some bad companies but there are at least as many ethical ones. My better half and I worked for various employers over the decade we were in the scene. We knew many, many of our peers. Abuse in the SF Bay Area was very rare. A major reason that some regions have more incidents is that adult entertainers are very often stigmatized in general, and are also ignored by law enforcement. Those bent on exploitation use that to their advantage.
What always frustrates me when people talk about porn in a negative light is how narrow of a view they tend to hold about what porn is. Not all porn is heavily edited videos produced by exploitative companies. The overwhelming majority of pornography I consume is made by independent creators. I listen to audio porn, read manga/comics, read text posts, and watch videos/pictures made by individuals.
Religious people usually are against it because you’re only allowed sex after marriage and you should really only see your husband ur wife in sexual acts. That’s why, and guess what, they’re allowed to have those beliefs. They’re not doing anything to you
@@AlexanderofMiletus It's not. That would be like saying watching TV is a addiction. It is only one when it effects your life or the life of others around you negativly. This can happend but you should'nt assume it is always the case, like wtf.
Suhv-chook is how its pronounced (I am Slavic). But wow, this is so wild! This guy did sermons for a week at a slavic church camp I went to! Crazy that now my deconstruction channels are discussing him 😂
Thank you , I would love hear more from you about how people are willing to put limits on themselves that could be bad for them; Because I have that problem. Big hugs thank you for sharing❤
@@Tessilla-ie4pn I from a relationship limitting side of things would suggest you research about different types of relationships, ex queer relationships, asexual relationships,polygamy, just understand how they differ from the sterotypical nuclear family we are pushed into. Also it's important to understand the split attraction model and compulsary heterosexuality, cus even if you are straight or queer you can easily mix signals like being aestetically attracted to someone but not romantically.
It’s nihilism. Man would sooner will to nothing than not will at all. Ascetic idealism. They think by limiting themselves they’re better than you. Simple and yet not. Makes no sense to me any more.
36:05 In my experience, when confronted by such evidence in any scenario, the go to line is "oh well you THINK it's not hurting you/doing you good, but it's not". Basically, they invalidate evidence that contrasts their assumptions.
I’ve never heard any Christian’s irl saying that marital rape isn’t a thing or is okay. However I heard a youth pastor’s wife say something that makes women more susceptible to coercion or not saying no to something they don’t want. It was a purity sermon for high school girls. She said that even though pre-marital sex is a sin, sex is not bad because you need to do it after marriage. A role model in a position of authority telling teenage girls that they need to have sex is disgusting. How can you say that and say that consensual premarital sex is immoral
This aligns with research that people who grew up in purity culture are more likely to believe "r*pe myths." Basically, while large swaths of evangelical Christians would never say they thought r*pe was okay, they are likely to call things that are r*pe NOT r*pe.
I did. Unfortunately. And it was from someone I actually respected before that. He said that "sex is a godly responsibility of a wife and if she's rebelling against her husband he may be forced to make her fulfill it".
@@curlzOdoom THIS, YES. People so often misunderstand what r*pe culture is, its not a culture that says “r*pe is okay” explicitly, but rather define things in such a way that excuses, condones and encourages behaviour that is in fact r*pe, or leads to it, without calling it that
And then here's the kicker. Just google "sexless marriages" and you will be astounded at how often that shows up on advice channels. So you aren't supposed to have sex before marriage, but then when you do get married, you sometimes find that after a while the sex stops and never resumes. Just do a search on how often people write in or call in and say they have been in a sexless marriage for decades. And a big reason for one partner withdrawing from the other in this way is porn addiction. They'd rather indulge in passive fantasy than the real living person next to them. I'm surprised that aspect wasn't brought up.
So excited for this video! 50% for the commentary and critique of the problematic content by both of your perspectives and 50% for the supportive way you and Drew interact and discuss topics while not being an echo chamber. Just proof that a couple doesn't need a sky daddy to have healthier relationships. ❤❤
I think the absence of 'sky daddy' is quite often a benefit to having a healthy relationship, especially considering the myriad dangerous suggestions in religious texts when it comes to intimate relationships.
"Just proof that a couple doesn't need a sky daddy to have healthier relationships." Sky daddies are certainly helpful in some situations. But I was in the Navy where we had sea daddies (mentors). I suppose the Air Force has sky daddies.
“If you [are ok with polygamy] then you are crazy!!” - guy who believes in a fairytale book about magical talking donkeys & snakes Holy moly. This is a great example of the pot calling a transparent-window black.
@@MagickP00dle yeah, the book about God sacrificing his son/self to himself to save us from “mysterious” (meaning BS) rules he made up about needing a sacrifice.
Which I would never have ever in a million years agree with or be part of or even allow any male to think that I would be in any relationship like that. I'd not be ok ever. I'd not marry the man or even date him.
It always makes me laugh how much people take the Bible and apply it to today's standards and their own morals. I have heard people say "sexual immorality" is everything under the sun. It can be masturbation before marriage, masturbation alone during marriage, threesomes, watching porn alone in marriage, watching porn before marriage, watching porn period, having sex before marriage, having an*l sex, refusing sex in marriage, using sex toys... literally anything. But lots of Christians think many things on that list are fine or create weird rules to get around things (ie. you can masturbate in marriage, but only if your partner is away from you and you both agree to it lol) . People really are just making this up to fit their own personal standards. I was almost an adult when I found out the Bible said literally nothing about masturbation and that people were just assuming that it was "sexual immorality".
I was at a wedding once where the pastor gave a prayer thanking God for "giving us the institution of marriage to protect us from immorality". It was all I could do not to laugh out loud.
@@zapkvr There's a million different interpretations of what the "spilling of the seed" verse means and if it's still relevant so I'd make an argument that you're so sure that's the correct interpretation because of your personal biases (or a pastor's) like I said in the original comment. Some people group masturbation under spilling of the seed and some group it under sexual immorality.
People back then also believed that a man has only a finite amout of seed. So obviously it was bad in their World view to use it on anything other than reproduction.
This hilarious. Speaking as an atheist and someone who practices ethical nonmonogamy, it just always cracks me up to see religious people squirm about these things. But I say to each their own, if it ain't for you it ain't for you.
Thanks because even tho religious people can have polygamy as a choice it is shunned as back in those days a man was only allowed to do it to take care of divorcees or widows due to stigma back then. Now Christian’s don’t really do it because they believe you’re made in pairs. I’m not Christian but have a lot of orthodox Christian friends that have waited for sex until marriage and practice the Old Testament.
I laughed out loud at the, "usually it is the husband forcing pornography into the marriage bed," comment. I won't go into details, but it is exactly the opposite in our case 😂
A bit of constructive criticism: what I liked about the old setup was seeing you both in the frame at the same time. When it cuts between the two of you like this, it gives it more of an "interview" feel.
I just recently found the "marriage counselling" book by Tim LaHaye (yes THAT Tim LaHaye) my mom gave me back in 2012 before I got married. I'm planning on rereading it to see exactly how hilarious it is
THAT guy. I used to read his column in Campus Life way back when -- "Love, Sex, and the Whole Person." Should have been Control, Repression, and the Neurotic Wreck.
Read it definitely. I just bought a book by John Paulk called “Love won out.” Jon was a national Christian figure regarding gays repenting and becoming happy in a straight marriage. Fast forward a decade and he was found going to gay bars. The book and advice is so ironic.
Tim Lahaye's book on sex is actually pretty good 👍🏽 I forgotten the name, I'll check later. Also what did Tim Lahaye do? I'm not really informed about pastors wrongdoings that much.
@@phi4721 He was pretty homophobic and just generally supported and founded some harmful groups / people. He also thought that the Illuminati were trying to turn America into "an amoral, humanist country, ripe for merger into one-world socialist state", super against a bunch of top colleges and POC, Women's and Queer rights groups and like other major foundations that do some good stuff (like the Rockefellers). Also had lots of weird rapture theories. Selective literalism was another big thing he did. He also was a critic of the Catholic church and said they were a false religion (even though they were the first Christians), don't know how he got there, though. So just lots of pretty bad and extremist takes. Mostly looking at wikipedia and some old news articles when he died for this info.
@@phi4721I thought for sure you were talking about Ed Wheat's surprisingly wholesome book about Christian sexuality. The Leaving Eden podcast did a whole episode reviewing "Intended for Pleasure", which is still fairly open-minded for an IFB-approved marriage guide. LaHaye's "The Act of Marriage" was groundbreaking in addressing female pleasure but still clung very tightly to fundie gender roles (men are lustful all the time, women only want love and don't initiate, that sort of stereotypes) Both books are rather impressive for their time.
@@vberryo0 я с Америки, потому что мои родители сюда приехали 😅. И прости что я только могу по-русски говорить/писать. Я тоже не знал что столько много Украинцев смотрели эти видео!
@@Sillygoose1133I'm similar - American with Russian-speaking Ukrainian family, don't speak well enough to write in Ukrainian.. I follow a lot of Ukrainian cultural stuff on RU-vid (in Ukrainian) and I'm always horrified when I see that evangelicals have made big inroads there. It's going to be even worse after the war. I'm curious if/where there is skeptic type content in Ukrainian. It's obviously none of my business whether people get comfort from religion at this time but evangelical/fundamentalist Christianity is not generally a good thing.
@@_s827in my experience a lot of Slavic people in America are fundamentalists Christians, wether Baptist or I forgot the name but they believe in tongues. So I totally get what you mean.
Proud swinger here! The term “wife swapping” is considered outdated and misogynistic and not used much anymore. Husband and wives both need to be on board.
"Spouse swapping" to my knowledge is another term (maybe less used) for swinging, which is distinct from polyamory and like you said many poly people do see it as misogynistic. Whenever I've seen swinging events advertised they often have a limit on the number of men allowed or a ban on single men, and every man attending has to bring a female partner, but women are allowed to attend without a partner or with another woman. So to me the culture of swinging has always implied commodification of women and I agree with you that it is far more about monogamy. In fact I'd say it's a way to "experiment" while still maintaining control of the existing dynamics between both yourself and your partner, ie without disrupting the current monogamous dynamics and status quo, whereas polyamory is seen as feminist, because, as many people point out, cultures which punished adultery typically only really punished women for doing it, allowing men to have other partners, mistresses and even additional wives, and polyamory is basically giving women the same ability to do what men have been doing for millenia. That said I think polyamory isn't immune from patriarchal implications, particularly when it comes to new couples joining polyamory and "exploring". Practices like the "one penis policy/ hot bi babe", "unicorn polyamory" and hierarchical polyamory reinforce both patriarchy and often "couple privilege" of a "primary" couple, often in a heteronormative way. However, many people I know who identify as polyamorous and have done so for a while, rather than "trying" polyamory as a "lifestyle" are wary of these kinds of dynamics if not having strong negative or cautionary opinions on them and the problematic norms they perpetuate. To me those questionable dynamics are a rather artificial way to still control women and maintain the "status quo" of a primary, often cis-het couple and their positions in a "hierarchy" (in which "the third" or any "secondary partners" - which are actual terms used) are at the bottom.
If presented with evidence of something the Bible forbids providing a measured benefit to a marriage, they’d most likely default to the idea that spiritual health is more important than personal fulfillment and say it still shouldn’t be done.
I don't think they would go on and on about sexual sin and demons unless they were secretly rather attracted to them. That is why the bible belt anti-pornography crusader who has a collection of Playboy magazines in the locked bottom draw of his desk is such a well known stereotype. Jesus himself talked about the abuse of wealth and power about four times as often as he talked about marriage and sex. With many (but not all) pastors it is the other way round. You can tell a lot about someone by the battles they pick.
Without the Holy Spirit you wouldn’t understand. The Song of Solomon is basically talking about sex yes but sex is a beautiful thing created by God itself that needs to be talk about and that is healthy for the church and in the world. Sadly this world ruined the image of sex alone and porn is bad. It’s disgusting and haves also a lot of bad content of abuse and child porn as well and women getting abuse too and other stuff. The book of Solomon is different from porn. the book of Solomon goes into details of sex but the yearning between both of lovers. There’s is a big difference of porn and Song of Solomon, it’s like education during sex ed.
@@ashantiii1178 yes but the point is that it Song of Solomon does exist. The common view of Christian is sex is not talked about even in an educational setting. Think purity culture. Sex is bad outside marriage but within marriage it’s fine. Ok so you assume that both parties are virgins without any knowledge of sex trying to figure out sex for the first time. It’s awful. Also, when was the last time you’ve heard ANY preacher or pastor preach from Song of Solomon without the Christ bride twist or even in general. In all my 40 some years of being a Christian and going to church I’ve only heard it preached from once and even then the pastor tried to sugarcoat what was going on. My point ALOT of evengalicals tried to shame porn or even at the very least proper sex education but won’t even mention Song of Solomon. Which you said yourself was sex education for Christians
@@fox0277 yes you are 💯 right because the church itself and even pastors, being a evangelist is such a taboo subject to reach on sadly. God talks about it so clearly to us why can’t we ? So I definitely understand where you are coming from and there’s needs to be a change in the church about sex and porn itself. It’s important for teenagers and for the young adults and anyone to understand it because the idea of sex is beautiful and spiritual but like how I said that’s why sex is running wild because of the church and Porn is something that I know many of our brothers and sister Christ agree we shouldn’t bring it because of Adultery content and the laws of Christ but it should be taken a opportunity to speak upon it because you never know the struggles of one haves and it explains why a atheist run away from us or anyone who goes against Christianity itself. Also I never amuse that both Parties are virgins but I understand what you mean and also purity culture is toxic because one if a born again Christian wasn’t a virgin it can bring shame and discomfort so that should put away but to strive for being holy for Christ only and save sex until you are marry because outside sex within not marriage can lead to many heartbreaks and just look around the world how sex us being use so that’s my take on the purity part because honestly none of us are pure I think it’s funny is called purity culture because one needs to know whoever your spouse will be May be a virgin or not and it’s something shouldn’t be obsessive with but I really like that we are having this discussion thank you taking the time to reply back and hope the church opens to more and are not afraid but to educate many by law Christ of it not our lack of understanding but I also can say is nothing wrong if one wants their spouse to be a virgin because just look at hookup culture today some are having really intense going back and fourth conversations about it lol.
@@fox0277oh boo hoo. It’s religions fault…it’s the people that make it taboo. My friends are Christians and waited until marriage, one was a non-virgin but as long as you repent it’s fine and you move on and don’t do it again. Other people in the community made sex taboo, sex is supposed to be a positive think for marriage and is encouraged not only for reproduction but to strengthen the marriage to and just for fun. My friends told me sex is a blessing and you’re supposed to have fun together otherwise you’ll start thinking about others because you’re lacking it at home just like how if your partner was not affectionate you’d feel neglected. Both men and women are encouraged to have healthy sex with their partner. It’s people that ruin religion
@@andreakoroknai1071 Hi. Yes, y'know, because, just occasionally you should focus on having a worse experiences....like.....a little bit of whipping or spanking‼️ 😌 🌹 🌹 🌹
I see that mentality in Christianity alot. "You get what you get. Just be grateful to even be having sex at all even if it's not great or you want to improve it".
At least this Ukrainian couple are much more reality oriented in their discussion and advice than most Christian videos, although that’s generally a pretty low bar. As you and Drew discussed, some of the advice was very helpful - no force, mutual consent. That was refreshing, despite the talk of ‘demons’.
Actually if you take anything in the movie "quest for fire" seriously it was the black natives who taught the white Neanderthals the "evolved" missionary position compared to the primitive doggy style 😂. Great movie 👌🏻
Hey guys! About your new setup, i just want to say i personally kinda miss seeing you side by side! It felt more like an interview than a video you are doing together, if that makes sense? Otherwise, great work as always, it was a pretty interesting conversation !
Great video as always! One comment re: set I liked it when I could see you both in frame for these conversations or reaction videos. In this format it looks like you're in two separate rooms and jumping back and forth almost feels jarring. A third camera or position where you're both in frame also allows the audience to see the little looks and smiles you throw at each other which i always find really endearing. Keep up the great work and congrats on the move!
More like a Fivesome with Jacob because it wasn’t just Leah and Rachel, but they each brought a maidservant with them into the marriages and all four of them had children through Jacob (the fathers of the Twelve Tribes of Israel)
I'm living in non-monogamy relationship for many years. I think our communication is much better than most of the people in the world. It took much work and countless hours of talk. It needs defining boundaries, setting needs, specifying expectations, showing fears and constant updating of everything. This is the real commitment and love evidence for me. This couple is not able to see that at all.
Such interesting points. I really enjoy your videos. I'm a Christian but love thinking through/questioning things. You both speak so eloquently and respectfully, which is to be applauded.
Hi. I think that should have been spelled, sexeth of the buttOx (Oxbutt)😨 There's another section of the Bible that talks about not coveting your neighbors Ox-ass, etc. 😨
Hi. I think that should have been spelled, sexeth of the buttOx (Oxbutt)😨 There's another section of the Bible that talks about not coveting your neighbors Ox-ass, etc. 😨
Pasco? My sister lives there. Funny story. I sarcastically told my wife one time in about 2008 that I wouldn’t go up there to visit my mom or sister until I had my own plane so that I could leave at any moment. I didn’t have a pilot’s license or plane. As it turns out, I didn’t go up there again until 2020-in my own plane.
I often joke about "lets do it christian style" "what do you mean christian style?" "Ya know missionary ,no kissing,full eye contact and minimal movement"
My headcanon has always been that Paul was sexually attracted to men, and that's why he focused so much on sex and marriage/having sex/abstaining from sex, because he felt immense shame about his sexual desires (edit, this is talking about Paul of Tarsus from the Bible, not Paul of Paul and Morgan)
@@fairygodmother139 not rude, it's a headcanon. It makes sense to me as a gay nonbinary person to read Paul as having Gay Thoughts™ and writing from that perspective. And a large part of the reason that modern Christians practice abstinence before marriage is because of Paul's writings in the New testament. The Old testament certainly condemns premarital sex, but Paul really expanded upon that idea and fleshed it out in his epistles
@GeneticallyModifiedSkeptic Drew, I'm a huge fan! I wanted to clear something up you said about 1 Cor 7:5. At around 40:30 when you commented that this verse can also be taken to mean that a man owes sex to a woman, you said it is "not as relevant of a problem". I think you meant so say it's "not as common of a problem", but it is most certainly relevant. When I finally realized that this verse was being used against me in an abusive manner and that I did not deserve the guilt that was being heaped upon me for not consenting, it ultimately led to the unravelling of my marriage (and eventually my faith.) The general stigma that men are not on the receiving end of abuse prevented me from recognizing it and remaining in an abusive relationship for much longer than I should have. Again, I don't think you meant anything malicious by saying "not as relevant", but I wanted to point this out to any other men who are victims of abuse so that they don't feel marginalized. Thanks again to both of you for your great content!
@@Marie-Ray The word "Ukraine" comes from the word that means "the outskirts" - (rus. Okraina). So saying "the Ukraine" implies its THE outskirts [of Russia], bc of the geography, therefore denying the soveregnity of the country. There is a similar thing in russian, so you can tell whoo is pro-war and anti-war jsut by them using "Ukraine" in a sentence
@@ritasheeps I don't see how adding a redundant "The" adds any meaningful context, especially such specific geographic context that is already implied by "outskirts." It's literally just "The the outskirts" which, while grammatically incorrect, doesn't seem to even hint at anything geopolitical that wasn't already present.
Until you mentioned it at the end I didn't realise you were in the same room. It looks like two different sets. So my advice for the future is to make it clearer that you are sitting together in the same place.
As a Christian myself, I have a simple view when it comes to sex. It’s a good thing, a gift. However, if you use it as a means to hurt others and indirectly hurt yourself (through blatant addiction), that’s when it turns into something completely abhorrent. Basically it’s a case of, with great gifts comes great responsibility.
Jacob woke up the morning after and behold it was Leah! Not to mention the fact that bilha and milkah birthed their babies on the lapse of Rachel to make it look like she had the baby.
Great point by Drew on the "if it's not prohibited assume it's probably ok" comment. The Bible doesn't encourage polygamy, but it's also never explicitly prohibited. It's only encouraged when it says a man has to marry his dead brother's widow, but Paul "reverses" that in the new testament. The Bible never prohibits slavery. Smoking, drugs, and gambling are also not mentioned but aren't necessarily a good thing.
Fantasy as thought. Because anything you are thinking is just like doing . . . so if you are fantasizing about sex with someone else, it's just like doing it with someone other than your spouse. It's just like thinking about robbing a bank, etc. It's just the same as doing. . . part of the reason I left Christianity
@@fairygodmother139 I was answering a question posed by Taylor. What's my issue? Since YOU asked IMO it is one of the (many) stressors religion puts on adherents . . . how much of a failure do you feel when those thoughts come into your head unbidden? "Oh I accidently thought of doing xyz, now I'm guilty of doing it. I must seek forgiveness, absolution"
How do you know about bang bros Drew???🤣🤣🤣 Oh shit, how do I know about bang bros?🤦♂️🤭 I love you guys, thank you for all that the two of you do…together and separately!
I'm poly, and after years of being in the church, I can honestly say that I feel much more free to live a life of love now. I wish those who judged realised they could have that peace, joy, and love they preach about if they stop worrying about all these arbitrary rules.
What happens behind closed doors is really no one's business unless it is hurting someone? The only time it may be someone's business if it involves hurting children.
Do Christians talk about other sins using the same language to describe sexual sins? No. They do not. I was brought up Catholic during the Vatican II reforms and I recall very distinctly that the "sins of the flesh" (which was never really defined but understood to refer to a certain part of the body that you were not supposed to touch except for hygiene purposes) were stigmatized in a way that stealing, coveting, lying, mistreating others, and yes, even murder, were not. We were told that Our Lady told the children when she appeared to them in 1917 at Fatima, Portugal, that "the sins of the flesh are what sends most people to hell." Again, not embezzlement, not withholding wages, not charging unjust prices or interest rates or rent, not discriminating against others because of the color of their skin, not exploiting workers, no, it was "the sins of the flesh" that was the number one reason people went to hell. Funny, that didn't stop a certain sexual scandal from becoming widespread among the clergy.
Yeah you guys need to be in the same frame! Felt like you guys weren't in the same place but recording together but separate. Other than that, excellent video!!!! ❤❤
They are completely overstepping Ephesians 5:22-23. Wives submit to your husbands. No, I do not ascribe to this thinking, but as "committed fundamentalist christians", they SHOULD. This passage has been so often used by people of their ilk to force women into a submissive situation, including sex. It used to be the wife's "duty" to give her husband sex whenever he wanted it, and that was the fundamentalist christian viewpoint.
And they forget the “husbands love your wives” or even better, in another letter, “the husband submits to his wife and the wife submits to her husband.” (I’m paraphrasing)
Honestly it’s refreshing to see a Christian couple who I has chemistry (in my opinion). Like I think they really fancy each other and it would be cute if they were saying different things
@@fairygodmother139 Okay, but they're not just saying "this is what works for us." They're saying "this is *the right* way to do things *for everyone* bc it fits our interpretation of the Bible, and if you don't do things our way, you're letting demons into your heart/bed/whatever."
I love watching you guys, but about the new set... if that is an option, I would like to see you sitting next to each other like you did before. I just really enjoy seeing how you interact with each other and it makes me feel more like I'm into a conversation with you than I'm watching a video idk. It also feels more spontaneous, maybe because of less obvious editing
Ukraine is religiously diverse, with Roman-catholic, Orthodox, muslim (Crimean tatars) and Greeko-catholic churches being the most prominent influences. Although we have a sizeable protestant population thanks to active proselytising of American and european protestant movements since early 1900-s.
I wouldn’t say we are diverse, I think that it would be more accurate to say that many religions/confessions are present in Ukraine. The predominant majority of religious Ukrainians are Orthodox Christians, even most of our Catholics are Orthodox :D P.S. I am aware that calling Greek Catholics ‘Orthodox Catholics’ is inaccurate.
Nowhere in the New Testament does it say that within appropriate and loving boundaries sex is a wonderful and very beautiful thing that is there for joy and healing and getting closer to someone you really adore and cherish (or words to that effect) Right from the book of genesis the Bible has a very difficult and tortuous relationship with sex and also with nudity. In fact it has sexualised the naked body by insisting that adult nudity is wrong completely except perhaps in the bedroom (and some Christians in history have even found it hard to be naked there)
Yet st Augustine augured to keep the Brothels in Rome open . During the Middle Ages the Church did allow it.. If you really want to read who the Holy Father picked to lead the Catholic Fleet for the Battle of Leponto? I am not saying, just saying.
You raise an important point here. Indeed Thomas Aquinas said that cities need their brothels in the same way as any palace would still need a sewer. This though is about allowing sex for money as a safety valve. St Paul himself - although I think he thought celibacy was better - thought it was better to get married than to burn (with romantic/lusty passion) All of this though is sex management. How to keep something powerful and frightening as diverted and untroublesome as possible. I actually think that prostitution is very often a poor deal for many people (not least for the majority of prostitutes) . Tellingly one American survey found that around 50% of men who regularly saw prostitutes did it more for the company than for the physical sex. Loneliness can be a real cancer. What I am saying though is that within correct loving boundaries (that all important clause) the Bible New Testament does not rejoice in sex as a good and loving and wonderful thing between two people. Even a holy thing and a form of worship. This is miles away from "sex management" - the difference being between a fountain and a sewer.
Here's the problem with his underlying argument: His deity had no problem sending poisonous snakes to kill the Israelites in the desert for complaining about being bored with Manna. He had no problem punishing David for taking a census without asking Sky Daddy first. So why was he silent about David and Solomon's wives and concubines?
Mainly in the rules for bishops and deacons: 1 Timothy 3:2 (KJV) A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
