Comments on: God, Kurtz, Sex

By: Body'n'Soul

Body'n'Soul — Tue, 25 Jul 2006 11:45:35 +0000

See more at http://endorfine.blogspot.com

By: viagra

viagra — Wed, 14 Jun 2006 14:43:24 +0000

buy viagra ViaT8898111-01-01-22

By: xenical online

xenical online — Tue, 13 Jun 2006 22:47:48 +0000

xenical Xen-770009122-345566

By: phone babes UK

phone babes UK — Tue, 29 Nov 2005 19:16:05 +0000

Explore here the erotic lifestyle of millions of people through our Nude Photos and thousands of sexy webcam videos.

By: Jeremy Scharlack's Blog

Jeremy Scharlack's Blog — Sat, 03 May 2003 20:23:14 +0000

Back

… after a bit of a break. Been busy doing work; but look for some new Tech postings about some things I’ve learned. I have still had time to see what other bloggers have been up to. We celebrated Loyality…

By: SM

SM — Sat, 03 May 2003 08:50:30 +0000

Religions of the east – Hinduism has this concept of the ten incarnations AKA avatars of Vishnu where he assumes a corporeal body & walks among humans doing heroic things; i think around eight of the incarnations were human. One of tthe ten, Krishna, spelled Krsna by snobs and sanskrit classicists, has more girlfriends than the Hef.
So Lewis got his timelines wrong by maybe a few centuries. He may also be wrong about the erotic poetry; hinduism has tons of erotic poetry. As for contention that the greatest love poetry was created by Christians, who does he have in miind – Byron, Keats, Baudelaire, Ronsard, Shakespeare, Marlowe, Pushkin ? I doubt any of them would have thought of themselves as Christians as Lewis understood the term.
But who cares what C.S Lewis thought. He was a Fantasy writer – E.R Burroughs wrote much superior nonsense. Now, Clarke or Heinlein …

By: Mike Krempasky

Mike Krempasky — Sat, 03 May 2003 02:24:12 +0000

Lewis’ position would (if I remember) that not only is sex outside of marriage ilicit, sex inside marriage was no good if it wasn’t *open* to the possibility of children, it wasn’t as powerful as it could be. The whole total communion thing.

By: Derek Murrow

Derek Murrow — Fri, 02 May 2003 17:58:22 +0000

I am not an expert on Lewis, though I have read most of his books.

It would be diffucult to accurately read much into something that CS Lewis did not say (he never wrote that non-procreationary sex was dirty or sinful).

My impression from both Lewis and Biblical poetry, was that sex was an expression of love when the pleasure of another was the goal.
Which is much in contrast with alot of what we see in the way of intimacy, releaitionships, and ‘love’ these days.

By: Radley Balko

Radley Balko — Fri, 02 May 2003 16:53:40 +0000

I don’t doubt that he’d disapprove of sex outside of heterosexual marriage. But what about non-procreative sexuality within a marriage?

Seems odd that someone could deliver the quote above, but then find all sexulaity outside the sole purpose of babymaking to be undesirable.

But I’m far from an expert on Lewis.

By: Jane Galt

Jane Galt — Fri, 02 May 2003 16:49:18 +0000

I’m a big fan of Lewis, but he was adamantly against sex outside of heterosexual marriage. He also believed that wives should submit to their husbands along the lines of 1 Timothy. He’d agree with that Kurtz quote wholeheartedly, from what I’ve read.

By: Jason

Jason — Fri, 02 May 2003 14:26:54 +0000

It has been bash libertarian week. Did anyone see the Daily Show last night with the “libertarian” in NYC that is running the Guns for Tots program. I actually yelled at the TV, “You not helping.” I mean he is totally Daily Show material, but when they gave him the tag, libertarian (with a little “L”) I was crushed.

By: Mike Krempasky

Mike Krempasky — Fri, 02 May 2003 04:59:47 +0000

If you doubt that’s what Lewis meant, you doubt it using only the assumptions you bring to Lewis – not what you find there.