From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Wow! Feature this right now! I never saw a more subtlely biased article in my life. --MrMetalFLower 14:42, 7 March 2008 (EST)

The article will remain as it is, thank you very much. DanH 14:47, 7 March 2008 (EST)
I'm not saying change it. --MrMetalFLower 14:49, 7 March 2008 (EST)
What is your problem, then? The very term 'lust' doesn't exactly express approval of the act. Koba 14:56, 7 March 2008 (EST)
It was a joke. I was just saying the article goes right out and says "This is bad" :P --MrMetalFLower 14:57, 7 March 2008 (EST)

In defining a negative term such as lust I would naturally express it in 'negative' terms. Had I been defining 'desire' I might have expressed it differently. But this was a wanted term. If you would like to help here, have a look at the wanted terms list and have a crack at a few. Koba 14:59, 7 March 2008 (EST)

I said it was a joke, QED, it was a joke. --MrMetalFLower 15:01, 7 March 2008 (EST)
  1. intense sexual desire or appetite.
  2. uncontrolled or illicit sexual desire or appetite; lecherousness.
  3. a passionate or overmastering desire or craving (usually fol. by for): a lust for power.

that's a dictionary definition, in case anyone feels like increasing the length and depth of the article. --MrMetalFLower 15:01, 7 March 2008 (EST)

This article has a picture of a nearly naked woman. You can see her NIPPLE!!!! That is not family-friendly in the slightest, and is an abomination unto God, and I am ashamed and horrified that Conservapedia would use such a thing. I demand it be removed, and whoever placed it in the article to be reported to the proper authorities. --JRFinn 13:51, 25 February 2009 (EST)

In your sarcasm, you are failing to distinguish between God's beautiful creation and your self-centered (lecherous) desire to have what is forbidden to you. Your silly remark is actually a good starting point for a discussion of the distinction between lust in particular and sexual desire in general. It's the same kind of distinction that exists between fornication and sexual intercourse.
I saw a televised debate 3 or 4 decades ago between Reverend Jerry Falwell and pornographer Bob Guccione, in which the smut peddler put words in the mouth of the preacher. I was surprised the moderator didn't stop him and correct him on the spot. Guccione said that Falwell believed "sex is bad", a view that hasn't been part of Christian doctrine since Middle Ages.
Christianity teaches that sex is GOOD, but that illicit sex is bad. Just as food is good, but overeating is bad for your health, and too much of the wrong kind of food can also hurt you. It is sex outside of marriage that Christianity asserts is bad for one's spirituality. --Ed Poor Talk 07:49, 8 February 2010 (EST)