Same sex marriage

Henu the Great wrote:View source

It has been said and written so many times already. Why do you seek confirmation or validation when this is already laid out? You can live your life anyway.

Its true but I wonder after a cicle of Advanced purifications, my sexuality changed and I wonder is it because being hetero is the natural state or what. The statments on TOZ is very short, does not go in many details about why do Homosexuals and Bisexuals exist and how they should live their lifes, and I would like to know more. It would help me a lot understand if I'm living my life the best I can.

luis wrote:View source

Sexuality is HUGE part of someones life. Having problems with it of any kinds, can make you unable to advance spiritually. So since its so important we as a community should refrain to make negative statements. We have our sexual etichs that says it's okay to engage in any sexual activity between consenting adults, we only deny pedofilia, bestiality and so on.

Where did I wrote something "bad" about sexuality in my post?

luis wrote:View source

Its true but I wonder after a cicle of Advanced purifications, my sexuality changed and I wonder is it because being hetero is the natural state or what. The statments on TOZ is very short, does not go in many details about why do Homosexuals and Bisexuals exist and how they should live their lifes, and I would like to know more. It would help me a lot understand if I'm living my life the best I can.

Did it change, or did your perspective of it change? In any case, whatever happens, happens. Take it as it comes.

One lives life as they best see fit, and adjust as they learn more. I find it appalling to seek mechanical methods for something as simple as existing when certain labels are concerned.

Nikólaos666 wrote:View source

Where did I wrote something "bad" about sexuality in my post?

Sorry I did not mean to reply to you. It was a general statement.

Henu the Great wrote:View source

Did it change, or did your perspective of it change? In any case, whatever happens, happens. Take it as it comes.

One lives life as they best see fit, and adjust as they learn more. I find it appalling to seek mechanical methods for something as simple as existing when certain labels are concerned.

I actually found out I'm bisexual. I like womens now. I dont know how to explain it. And honestly I don't know how to live my life now. I like both for different things but I can't have a relationship we both at the same time obviously, or at least in this society it's not something that it's accpeted and honestly I don't even know if it's the right thing to do. I like men a lot I don't like the idea to not have sex with a men anymore but at the same time womens have things men don't and obviously you can't have a family with a men.

The TOZ does gives life advices too lately, what type of partner to have for procreation and things like this but there is nothing about homosexuality and bisexuality, so I would like to know more.

luis wrote:View source

I actually found out I'm bisexual. I like womens now. I dont know how to explain it. And honestly I don't know how to live my life now. I like both for different things but I can't have a relationship we both at the same time obviously, or at least in this society it's not something that it's accpeted and honestly I don't even know if it's the right thing to do. I like men a lot I don't like the idea to not have sex with a men anymore but at the same time womens have things men don't and obviously you can't have a family with a men.

When "new mental ground" is gained, comes a period of integration and adjustment. It takes time to process it all and to make sensible mental models. You seem a little bit confused here, and that is part of the process. I will end by saying that you decide with whom you want to be with, consensually, of course. That is what it boils down to.

luis wrote:View source

The TOZ does gives life advices too lately, what type of partner to have for procreation and things like this but there is nothing about homosexuality and bisexuality, so I would like to know more.

Sorry, I must have missed where it is explicitly stated what kind of partner should be taken and so forth. I thought that we use our own faculties to determine who to be with, and not to be with.

Henu the Great wrote:View source

When "new mental ground" is gained, comes a period of integration and adjustment. It takes time to process it all and to make sensible mental models. You seem a little bit confused here, and that is part of the process. I will end by saying that you decide with whom you want to be with, consensually, of course. That is what it boils down to.

Sorry, I must have missed where it is explicitly stated what kind of partner should be taken and so forth. I thought that we use our own faculties to determine who to be with, and not to be with.

I do understand it takes time to adjust. But it honestly feels like I like both and I have to choose what type of life I want to live because it will be different with a women or a men, and it kinda suck to choose.

Here it says on how to choose your partner https://templeofzeus.org/advancedphilosophy/Eugeneia.phpExternal ↗

Asra wrote:View source

Did I miss an update? Weren't all 3 sexual orientations normal traits the soul keeps throughout lifetimes?

This critical commentary on the way some people have intercourse is very disrespectful to our Brothers and Sisters of this nature. This shouldn't be of anyone's concern and it's unbelievable to me that it's being used as an argument. It's not valid, because during heterosexual sex too, even when both partners are healthy, unpleasant biological effects can occur (vaginal irritation and microtears, temporary swelling, spotting, pelvic cramps, etc). By these people's logic, heterosexual sex isn't healthy either, and all forms of intercourse are gross.

Hello. Don't let yourself be pushed into decisions about the Temple by people who don't speak for the Temple.

It would be nice if people start being considerate about the following (instead the constant hyper emotional replies when an opposing view is met with direct and objective points. If the rest of us you speak of acted the same way as BluecollarButch then maybe you would have a point but you are making something out of nothing here.);

We are online and not in front of each other so the "sounding" can come off totally different than what it is meant to be.

Never did I mention I agree or disagree with anything here and that goes for trans as well.

Yes, the person I elaborated for didnt have to chime in the first place since we werent even talking about homosexuality and that's why I agreed with how unnecessary it was to bring it up when someone else butted in and said it wasn't needed to be said.

Is it not a fact the immune system goes down? You just admitted it yourself. This has more to do with what the seed does than any opinion if its good or not. Claiming it to be unhealthy is more subjective but their point was based on something instead of pulling out of thin air. I presented the information on what might be meant and added that BluecollarButch should move on from feeling personally attacked as this place isn't for validation of sexuality and a waste of time to change people's opinions (those who do have it) on it. We weren't even in place where homosexuality was being bashed. It was a simple back and forth, smh.

This isn't directly towards you but in general. People complain they feel attacked when replied to with objectivity but the irony now is posts like these shame people from sharing information in a back and forth conversation.

So because one person is acting emotional and threatening to leave i have to work harder to sound nice? Well I did try in the last messages but looks like this effort is one way.

Summary, it's an online board and the topic leaned towards objectivity in what happens to the body. The delivery can come out harsh, I agree, and I agree I can miss how it sounds, but we aren't in front of each other where one will be able to tell I am speaking kindly and genuinely.

Let's stop with this epistemot already and engage with proper pushback instead of this weird shame thing people keep trying to do.

Bluecollarbutch666 wrote:

My ex girlfriend is in the past, and I was looking for input from an outside perspective after I was discarded twice. I had a few people who were supportive specifically who replied but most said nothing which is fine. I'm not saying everyone isn't supportive and don't mean to discredit who are, but they aren't the majority.

As I was there everytime, absolutly no one discarded you. We offered an ear for you to let the pressure off. We were supportive. There was 1 or 2 members with false beliefs about homosexuality. We are individual people following the same organization but we are not the legal perspective of ToZ. People are inclined to their own beliefs. Only by advancing on the path of Ma'at, things will get clearer, for them, me and you.

You could have also came here, on the forum, to receive better support, as the chat is harder to follow up.

hailourtruegod wrote:View source

Is it not a fact the immune system goes down? You just admitted it yourself. This has more to do with what the seed does than any opinion if its good or not. Claiming it to be unhealthy is more subjective but their point was based on something instead of pulling out of thin air. I presented the information on what might be meant and added that BluecollarButch should move on from feeling personally attacked as this place isn't for validation of sexuality and a waste of time to change people's opinions (those who do have it) on it. We weren't even in place where homosexuality was being bashed. It was a simple back and forth, smh.

You seem to be confusing a few things.

It is a fact that male homosexual sex can cause irritation. What is not a a fact, is going from this biological effect to implying that homosexuality is unhealthy and pretending that anal fissures work as a good argument to discredit a trait at the soul level, or a healthy relationship between 2 individuals.

Not validating a sexuality is different from treating it this way. You say you have no opinion, so I assume it wasn't your intention. I'm simply telling you this is the way your long list of replies comes off, otherwise, I'm personally lost on what else you are trying to prove using anal irritation. Was it just a biological fact check? Because then, you're correct. Why insist on it? I'm sure every homosexual man knows what he's signing up for when deciding to go third base.

As about being misinterpreted, I'll tell you plainly why your replies sounded like that. They build on the other member's, who, in a great bout of sincerity, called homosexual sex "bad for your health". Your replies all invoke a negative biological effect, essentially acting as a justification to this claim.

hailourtruegod wrote:View source

Let's stop with this epistemot already and engage with proper pushback instead of this weird shame thing people keep trying to do.

One more thing, you make a pages-long reply finding fault in the way other people have intercourse. This functions as a shame tactic, because sex is a sensitive topic for the majority of people.

Asra wrote:View source

You seem to be confusing a few things.

It is a fact that male homosexual sex can cause irritation. What is not a a fact, is going from this biological effect to implying that homosexuality is unhealthy and pretending that anal fissures work as a good argument to discredit a trait at the soul level, or a healthy relationship between 2 individuals.

Not validating a sexuality is different from treating it this way. You say you have no opinion, so I assume it wasn't your intention. I'm simply telling you this is the way your long list of replies comes off, otherwise, I'm personally lost on what else you are trying to prove using anal irritation. Was it just a biological fact check? Because then, you're correct. Why insist on it? I'm sure every homosexual man knows what he's signing up for when deciding to go third base.

As about being misinterpreted, I'll tell you plainly why your replies sounded like that. They build on the other member's, who, in a great bout of sincerity, called homosexual sex "bad for your health". Your replies all invoke a negative biological effect, essentially acting as a justification to this claim.

One more thing, you make a pages-long reply finding fault in the way other people have intercourse. This functions as a shame tactic, because sex is a sensitive topic for the majority of people.

There you go. Assumptions instead of asking for clarifications...

hailourtruegod wrote:View source

There you go. Assumptions instead of asking for clarifications...

I'm not digging more into your intentions specifically because I don't want to assume. Your behaviour doesn't need clarifications either because it is displayed here in the open. If there's a gap between what you wanted to display and what it came across as, that's not a problem that has anything to do with me. I'm also not shaming you or arguing with you.

Asra wrote:View source

I'm not digging more into your intentions specifically because I don't want to assume. Your behaviour doesn't need clarifications either because it is displayed here in the open. If there's a gap between what you wanted to display and what it came across as, that's not a problem that has anything to do with me. I'm also not shaming you or arguing with you.

So you're allowed to dismiss how you are perceived then? But telling me to watch my words. How do you not see the obvious.

The answer is because you guys came into this with high emotions. You can't help it but perceive things this way because of the fact that you admitted you and others are sensitive about. That is what is happening here. I already admitted and said I am aware of how I can sound on an online board and expressed myself better but you dismissed that and stuck on to what angered you. Yeah, no arguing but you sure aren't trying to be in my shoes even though I am trying to and that's why I said I am only doing a back and forth conversation so no need to assume I am against anything.

Is this too long of a reply for you too? Yes, I am being snippy because my patience is being spit back into face and now I have devolved into your way.

hailourtruegod wrote:View source

So you're allowed to dismiss how you are perceived then? But telling me to watch my words. How do you not see the obvious.

The answer is because you guys came into this with high emotions. You can't help it but perceive things this way because of the fact that you admitted you and others are sensitive about. That is what is happening here. I already admitted and said I am aware of how I can sound on an online board and expressed myself better but you dismissed that and stuck on to what angered you. Yeah, no arguing but you sure aren't trying to be in my shoes even though I am trying to and that's why I said I am only doing a back and forth conversation so no need to assume I am against anything.

Is this too long of a reply for you too? Yes, I am being snippy because my patience is being spit back into face and now I have devolved into your way.

I was telling you it's better to avoid looking like you support incorrect claims, that you apparently don't believe in anyway, given you said you don't have an opinion. 90% if not more of the human population is emotional about sex. You're being ironic on purpose, and I could say you're being emotional here. Unless you're open to understanding where criticism comes from, there's nothing I can do to help you. I'm also not forcing you to hold a conversation or expect you to do a kneeling apology, so I think this attiude is unwarranted.

We should all take a deep breath and go outside and enjoy nature. Take the time to meditate and advance. This is an emotionnal thread and everyone should understand how what you are writing can be misinterpret.

I am leaving this here, because the discussion crossed into unproductive territory. I had nothing against your delivery, as you seem to believe. It didn't look overly harsh to me. My problem was with the correlation you made, so with the content. My aim was to let you know your words are not only different from the Temple's stance, but also disrespectful toward some of its members. This isn't something that can easily be misinterpreted or treated like a wrongdoing, so I suggest you reflect on why it seemed that way to you. In case it's harder to read tone in texting, I have no resentment or hate for you.

Asra wrote:View source

. You're being ironic on purpose, (assumption)

This is what i personally never liked in general and why I am losing patience. Assumption instead of asking for clarification.

Again, it was a back and forth only. I meant no offense and only wanted to engage in discussion. But instead it was taken as an attack because people can't handle basic dialogue anymore even in this place.

Criticism and emotional pushback are entirely different. But you did mix them together. Let's not pretend that you didn't.

Asra wrote:View source

I am leaving this here, because the discussion crossed into unproductive territory. I had nothing against your delivery, as you seem to believe. It didn't look overly harsh to me. My problem was with the correlation you made, so with the content. My aim was to let you know your words are not only different from the Temple's stance, but also disrespectful toward some of its members. This isn't something that can easily be misinterpreted or treated like a wrongdoing, so I suggest you reflect on why it seemed that way to you. In case it's harder to read tone in texting, I have no resentment or hate for you.

Fair enough. Perhaps I did the same towards you and perceived all this wrong myself and it looks like you're giving me the same grace.

I'll keep your advice in mind. 🙏

hailourtruegod wrote:View source

Criticism and emotional pushback are entirely different. But you did mix them together. Let's not pretend that you didn't.

I did: I criticized an argument, and then I pushed back on the implications of the initial claim. The reason I pushed back is because we know it to be incorrect, as it was stated before that homosexual relations are okay. It's normal for incorrect statements to get push-back. It isn't personal to any member here, and it's not a contradiction to the biological truth you mentioned.

In ancient times there was no formal marriage between homosexual people, because in 99% of cases they were contracts to unite families and to have children and continue lineages, in most cases people did not even get married because they loved their partner, but because of contracts and political, social and family duties.