Sign On
Create Account


multiple25-Oct-2001opinionspidertea by votes2401769.0%


In general, which of these things do you consider to be immoral?

Similar survey:

By "in general" I mean under normal every day circumstances.
For example- you may believe it is wrong to hit a dog, but if you were being attacked by a dog, you probably wouldn't think twice about it. But for every day circumstances you believe it is wrong.

174Having sex with someone against their will
166Killing another person for financial gain
162Not telling a sexual partner that you have a sexually transmitted disease
152Having sex with someone who is too intoxicated to give consent
149Necrophilia (sex with corpses)
147Bestiality (sex with animals)
142Killing another person out of anger/revenge
139A high school student sleeping with a teacher for a better grade
136Cannibalism (eating human flesh)
136Cheating on your significant other
133Hitting a significant other
128A college student sleeping with a professor for a better grade
125Driving while intoxicated
120Prostituting someone (pimping)
117Disliking someone because of their race/age/sex/sexual orientation or ethnicity
115Hitting a child
109Hitting a dog
107An adult having sex with a minor
107Smoking tobacco while pregnant
97Cheating on an exam
86Aborting a fetus for financial reasons
85Testing cosmetics on animals
81Corporal punishment (caning for example)
80Calling someone fat/ugly/stupid
76Cheating on your taxes
75Doing cocaine
75Hunting for sport
70Being a prostitute
67Sleeping with a prostitute
59Capital punishment (the death penalty)
55Burning your country's flag
48Telling a lie
47Doctor assisted suicide
44Having a threesome
43Same sex couples adopting children
42Aborting a fetus because of rape or incest
40Smoking marijuana
37Exaggerating on your resume
36Aborting a fetus because it is not likely to survive
35Same sex marriage
34Wearing fur
30Premarital sex
27Smoking tobacco
23Aborting a fetus because of danger to the mother
23Getting a divorce
21Drinking alcohol
17I don't believe in the concept of morality
15Wearing leather
13Killing another person in self defense
12Eating meat
11Religious views other than your own

posted 26-Oct-2001 6:43pm  
Great question
posted 26-Oct-2001 7:38pm  
A lot of these are unethical, but not necessarily immoral in my view.
posted 26-Oct-2001 9:40pm  
This is tough to use one scale on. There are things that are really disturbed like necrophilia, but maybe not immoral, one could consider tobacco immoral as doing harm to ones self but within an acceptable range.
I would answer much different depending if the adjective was bad, wrong, immoral, unacceptable, etc.
posted 26-Oct-2001 9:46pm  
A lot of people would gladly shoot a wolf for fun but not have sex with it and let it go. PLEASE, If I have a choice in the matter, I would much rather you get me too drunk to care and screw me than hunt me down for kicks.
posted 26-Oct-2001 9:52pm  
Abuse of people (especially children) and animals of any sort. Prejudice. Cannibalism (I know in Fiji they still do it, but where else??!!! surprise).
I also learned a new word from this survey. Necrophilia. I had seen a report on CNN or something about it, I forget. I didn't get the name. That also is immoral.
posted 26-Oct-2001 11:43pm  
Hmm. That was pretty thought-provoking. Most I gave a lot of serious thought to, I had a problem whether or not to check cocaine. Wanting to alter consciouness is a perfectly natural thing to do, and humans aren't the only ones who seek to do this, but people on cocaine do some pretty immoral things. I've never known anyone to become nicer and more even-tempered when doing coke.
LindaH Silver Star Survey Creator
(reply to jkiehart) posted 27-Oct-2001 12:00am  
If someone occasionally engaged in 'adrenaline sessions' in which they listened to loud music, thought angry thoughts, and punched a punching bag, afterward leaving them in a hostile, angry, mean mood, would that be immoral?
posted 27-Oct-2001 12:46am  
Some of these things I might find distasteful and I might not choose to do...or I might discourage my child from doing these things...

but ultimately each individual(even my offspring) must define what for them is right...or wrong....

I refuse to label things as moral or immoral
posted 27-Oct-2001 12:47am  
I am a bit surprised that so few people think that pimping is wrong. It is so abusive and exploitive.
Also, apparently not everyone thinks it is wrong to have sex with someone against their will. Rape! That REALLY scares me.
(reply to Wicksy) posted 27-Oct-2001 12:48am  
posted 27-Oct-2001 1:31am  
I think 3 of the worst are Necorphilia, Bestiality, and Cannibalism even though there a lot more those are just plain nasty!!!
(reply to LindaH) posted 27-Oct-2001 5:31am  
No, not at all. That's healthy and normal.
(reply to spidertea) posted 27-Oct-2001 5:35am  
I put pimping as immoral without even thinking about it. Just read about a bust pimping bust (happy that they didn't title it a "prostitution bust" here in Queens. They controlled women with hot clothing irons, they had a 12-year-old-girl... sick. I have no problem with a mature woman, and a mature man who would exchange money or --
sorry, listening to music...
love radiohead
Biggles Bronze Star Survey Creator
posted 27-Oct-2001 6:25am  
A lot of these things I consider worng, but not immoral. Morality is a complicated concept and without a precise definition it's difficult to say what exactly I consider immoral.
posted 27-Oct-2001 10:49am  
Most of what I checked off I did because it is against my morals, but I'm not nessicarily going to think it is wrong if someone else does it. But some things, like rape, I think are wrong no matter who does it.
posted 27-Oct-2001 10:52am  
Rape; a teacher having sex with a student; cheating on your spouse or significant other; being a pimp; killing someone for financial gain; abusing any person or animal. A couple of the things on this list are too gross to even think of (bestiality and cannibalism). I don't know is immoral is the word. They're just plain GROSS!
posted 27-Oct-2001 11:32am  
Sleeping with a teacher/professor, sleeping with animals (eww), being a prostitute/pimping, calling someone names, cannabalism, cheating on an SO, taxes or exam, disliking someone for no good reson, corporal punishment, doing cocaine, gambling, drink driving, rape, hitting a dog or SO, hunting, killing for financial gain or anger, necrophilia, not informing sexual partners of STD's, shoplifting, smoking pot, testing cosmetics on animals, and wearing fur.
LindaH Silver Star Survey Creator
(reply to jkiehart) posted 27-Oct-2001 12:35pm  
Do you have AOL IM? Radiohead has a bot with the screen name Googlyminotaur. It's fun.
posted 27-Oct-2001 2:41pm  
I selected all but twelve. I was going to list the ones I didn't pick, but twelve is too many. Just for fun, I'll name in my next comment, the one I didn't pick that appears highest on the list and the one I did pick that appears lowest on the list.
posted 27-Oct-2001 2:44pm  
I don't think that cheating on an exam is immoral. I do think that wearing leather is. Oddly enough, I've never cheated on an exam, but I wear leather quite often...
(reply to autumnlight) posted 27-Oct-2001 4:30pm  
What about wearing leather?
posted 27-Oct-2001 6:11pm  
Some of these where difficult for me to answer,as some of them did not have a condition under which it might be done.

Like spanking a child,for me is not immoral.Not unless some tend to go above & beyond the reason for a swat on the butt to correct a child,then that to me is considered child abuse in my eyes.

Many to me were to vage a question for me to answer properly.frown
(reply to LindaH) posted 27-Oct-2001 7:29pm  
Darn! Nope, no AOL.
posted 27-Oct-2001 9:14pm  
20 of these things. I'm not going to list them.
posted 27-Oct-2001 11:15pm  
I'm not sure were wearing leather or fur, or eating meat would be really bad. Could be, I guess.
LindaH Silver Star Survey Creator
posted 28-Oct-2001 12:11am  
I'm baffled as to why disliking someone for stuff that shouldn't matter got more votes than calling someone a name. I think there's a difference between disliking someone, and acting on it. I think a silent dislike (for whatever reason) is a whole lot better than name calling and harassment.
posted 28-Oct-2001 12:45am  
I think "immoral" means different things to different people. I checked the things on this list that I think are really awful and should never be done (like killing someone for financial gain). There are other things on the list that I think are bad, but not necessarily immoral (such as not liking someone because of their race, etc.).
(reply to LindaH) posted 28-Oct-2001 12:54am  
I agree with you there. I didn't consider either of them immoral though. Mean and stinky yes, but not immoral. Which brings us back to trying to find a common definition. Even the dictionary definition didn't help me.
(reply to jkiehart) posted 28-Oct-2001 1:01am  
Actually you don't need to be on AOL to have AOL IM (Instant Messenger). You can download it for free at and it allows you to chat with individuals or groups in your own private chat window. I really love it! It's super easy to use, and very handy. The hardest part for me was finding a screen name that wasn't already taken. I highly recommend it if you have any interest in that sort of thing.
(reply to SueBee) posted 28-Oct-2001 1:11am  
Okey dokey!
I have the Yahoo one loaded, but I never use it. I always get odd messages from people I've never even met before.
(reply to jkiehart) posted 28-Oct-2001 1:49am  
Ew, that's weird. On AOL IM people have to know your screen name in order to send you a message, and nobody knows your screen name unless you tell them.
(reply to Jemmy) posted 28-Oct-2001 4:55am  
I was gonna say that because it is immoral but then I would be a hypocrite cos I wear leather myself. I might not in the future though. I've never really thought about leather until now.
posted 28-Oct-2001 11:07am  
Quite an immoral list!!! I checked quite a few.
(reply to SueBee) posted 28-Oct-2001 2:54pm  
On Yahoo, you can browse the profiles of the users and send them messages if they're logged in to IM. Needless to say, I don't log in anymore. Oh, but it's really annoying, because when I'm in games (which is all the time), it allows others to reach you. I HATE having my Bingo game interrupted.
Bingo: I'm getting old.
(reply to jkiehart) posted 28-Oct-2001 3:18pm  
Beach blanket bingo?
(reply to Kristal_Rose) posted 28-Oct-2001 3:28pm  
Just plain old "speed" bingo. I don't know why I play it so much, you don't even win anything. Just a non-drug time-waster, I guess.
posted 28-Oct-2001 3:58pm  
Sleeping with teachers for better grades (sleeping with teachers for fun or love is okay for me),capital punishment,corporal punishment,disliking on the base of someone race/etc...,having sex with someone who don't or can't give consent,not telling your partner that you have a disease,testing on animals....hitting a child or a this is hard/humiliating problem if it's a "light" spanking.Everything else,killing,necrophilia,same sex not immoral for me.Maybe disgusting (necrophilia) or just something I would never do (like killing or marrying another woman).
I'm very moral,but my morals aren't in the average I suppose! wink
posted 28-Oct-2001 6:30pm  
There were a number of things I didn't mark here because they weren't drawn quite narrowly enough. For instance, in this country an 18-year-old is an adult and a 17-year-old is a minor. But, in my opinion, there's nothing morally wrong with them sleeping together. Had the question been "having sex with someone under the age of consent", which implies a first person point of view and doesn't use a term with a legal definition unrelated to sex, I would have marked that option as immoral.
posted 28-Oct-2001 6:46pm  
i clicked off 21 of those.
posted 28-Oct-2001 6:49pm  
me and lovelight are wondering why, according to the statistics of this survey at the time we looked at it, why it is more immoral to hit a dog than to hit a child.
(reply to autumnlight) posted 28-Oct-2001 6:58pm  
Yeah, I know. I was always against fur, but then I realized I wear leather, and it is basically the same thing.
(reply to jkiehart) posted 28-Oct-2001 7:35pm  
It seemed like such a catholic old lady thing to do, waiting for your number to come up.
(reply to jkiehart) posted 28-Oct-2001 10:42pm  
On AOL IM you don't have to set up a user profile, so you can be totally anonymous. I really like that feature a lot.

I play Bingo and some other games at Excite sometimes. Can you actually win any money playing Yahoo games?
(reply to heyzeus1) posted 28-Oct-2001 10:49pm  
I think they're both bad, but I wonder if some people think it's okay to discipline a child with a spanking, but that it's never okay to hit a dog. It's also possible that people skimmed over the choices quickly and missed some. *shrug*
(reply to SueBee) posted 29-Oct-2001 1:59pm  
Um, I'm pretty sure you can only win money from 11 pm to 12 am on Yahoo.
(reply to Jemmy) posted 29-Oct-2001 3:32pm  
Fur looks more more obviouslt animal like! That's my excuse, at least leather doesn't *look* like a dead animal! smile
(reply to autumnlight) posted 29-Oct-2001 3:35pm  
smile Yeah, I know.
posted 29-Oct-2001 10:16pm  
I checked everything, because it's all situational. Granted, I also didn't look at what I was checking, but hey, that's me.
(reply to jkiehart) posted 30-Oct-2001 12:10am  
posted 30-Oct-2001 7:27am  
Well, I'll probably hear about this...
LindaH Silver Star Survey Creator
(reply to jkiehart) posted 30-Oct-2001 1:07pm  
posted 30-Oct-2001 5:08pm  
I had a hard time deciding on hitting a child and a dog. I think they need to be punished buy a spanking if they did something bad, but hitting them just for the hell of it, ABSOLUTLEY WRONG.
posted 30-Oct-2001 5:09pm  
(reply to LindaH) posted 30-Oct-2001 10:49pm  
I don't know whether to congratulate Radiohead, or take the Johnny Rotten stance.
LindaH Silver Star Survey Creator
(reply to jkiehart) posted 30-Oct-2001 10:50pm  
What's the Johnny Rotten stance?
(reply to LindaH) posted 30-Oct-2001 10:54pm  
Past Q awards ceremonies, held at London's expensive Park Lane hotel, have seen boisterous behavior by some attendees. But this year the present-day chart-toppers were upstaged by John Lydon - formerly Johnny Rotten of the Sex Pistols - who received the ``inspiration'' award for his influence on music.

Lydon - who arrived at the hotel in a horse and cart and with his trademark shock of hair dyed orange and black - accepted his award in stalwart punk fashion.
``Who wants this?'' the 45-year-old punk pioneer asked the audience, ``because it doesn't mean anything to me.''
LindaH Silver Star Survey Creator
(reply to jkiehart) posted 30-Oct-2001 11:01pm  
Oh. laughing out loud
LindaH Silver Star Survey Creator
(reply to jkiehart) posted 30-Oct-2001 11:04pm  
For some reason, my last comment reminds me of a sneeze.
(reply to LindaH) posted 30-Oct-2001 11:23pm  
That word's actually in the SC dictionary!
LindaH Silver Star Survey Creator
(reply to jkiehart) posted 30-Oct-2001 11:51pm  
cool smile
(reply to Wookiewoman) posted 31-Oct-2001 3:16am  
posted 31-Oct-2001 8:14am  
what a stoopid website. What in the motherfuk is the point of this. U lot never talk about the subject, so just go to a damn chatroom. K?
(reply to bluedog) posted 31-Oct-2001 9:15am  
Sod off then, blue dogcrap!
posted 31-Oct-2001 10:51am  
I checked everything except
Burning your countries flag (that's unpatriotic, not immoral)
Calling someone fat/stupid/ugly (that's just mean)
Capital punishment
Corporal punishment
Driving while intoxicated (dangerous, not immoral. Being intoxicated is immoral, not driving while)
Eating meat
Hitting a dog (mean, not immoral)
Hunting for sport
Killing another person in self defense
Not telling a sex partner about an STD
Religious views other than my own
Same sex couples adopting children
Testing cosmetics on animals (mean, not immoral)
Wearing fur
Wearing leather

posted 31-Oct-2001 11:39am  
They're all immoral!!!! I need to go to church after reading these immoral thoughts!!!
posted 31-Oct-2001 1:41pm  
I didn't check any of them, but then I don't use the word immoral.
posted 1-Nov-2001 11:18am  
While hitting a child may be TECHNICALLY immoral, it sometimes becomes necessary to gain their attention when all else fails. This from a father of 3, step-father of 3, & grandfather of 11 who HAS hit children and regretted it.
Biggles Bronze Star Survey Creator
(reply to anonymous) posted 1-Nov-2001 2:28pm  
#2 To get their *attention*??? That's sick!
(reply to bluedog) posted 1-Nov-2001 6:55pm  
We've been here forever. One needs more in life that repeating their astrology sign, favorite CD, and sexual turn on every three months.
posted 5-Nov-2001 11:02am  
I'd always wondered what necrophilia was. And now I know. Ick.
posted 5-Nov-2001 3:40pm  
I feel that as long as you are not causing harm to another that it is not not immoral.
posted 8-Nov-2001 10:42am  
"My Gramma, what a large list you have."
"All the better to condemn you to hell with, Little Red Riding Human."
(reply to Oscar) posted 10-Nov-2001 7:12pm  
Why is it just mean to hit a dog, but not immoral?
How do you define immoral?
posted 11-Nov-2001 5:18pm  
what the heck is wrong with hunting for sport?
posted 11-Nov-2001 11:15pm  
I love to hunt for sport in fact I am going to hunt a squirrel tomorrow!! and then I am going to skin it and lleace the carcus on someones car
(reply to anonymous) posted 12-Nov-2001 5:19am  
how did you vote on bestiality?
(reply to spidertea) posted 12-Nov-2001 9:05am  
Immoral is against what the Bible says. I don't remember seeing anything about hitting a dog in the Bible.
Biggles Bronze Star Survey Creator
(reply to anonymous) posted 12-Nov-2001 4:25pm  
#3 - killing for pleasure is a little sick. But a straight shot that kills isn't as bad as hunting with dogs, say.
(reply to Oscar) posted 13-Nov-2001 12:06am  
Biblical rules changed. At one time animal sacrifices were appropriate, later they were not. Saints' sages, apostles, whatever were responsible for transcribing the morality appropriate for the time. They would probably consult with god and reside in the wisdom of the heart to prescribe things a bit different now. They probably do in fact, but with thousands of modern spiritual authors out there now, who knows how to find those in communion with god for advice on modern morality. My recommendation is to learn to talk to God and to follow the wisdom of your heart. Every moment calls for spiritual morality, yet the answers to situations won't always be in the book. True ethics transcend rules of behavior. If you act solely by the book, you will not be developing discernment. People who learn entirely from books, no matter how holy, run the risk of denying what is right in front of their face. For instance there are those who think because of how they interpreted what books teach, that animals don't feel. You damage them, they cry just like you or I would. It bugs me that people would deny that because a book was interpreted otherwise. Books were written for people that don't think or talk to god. What did the bible say about so many modern issues like cloning? Alone, it's not enough in this age. A higher connection than rules of morality written for desert tribes is required. The eskimos encourage wife swapping on long visits. This was not appropriate for large desert tribes, but in the arctic, societies would have died of gene strangulation following the bible. Folks like Moses talked to god and got the latest scoop. You can too. Read about the logos in the bible. That is talking to God, and the bible encourages it. It will supercede or interpret the bible for you. Follow the path of love, wisdom, and spiritual connection and you will prosper.
(reply to Oscar) posted 13-Nov-2001 12:30pm  
I'm sorry you can't make decisions without looking it up in the Bible. :(
(reply to spidertea) posted 13-Nov-2001 1:38pm  
I'm sorry you have to be mean to me.
Biggles Bronze Star Survey Creator
(reply to Oscar) posted 13-Nov-2001 1:45pm  
I'm sure she didn't mean it in a mean way, people who don't believe in the Bible don't see it in the same way that people who realy do (like you) do.

((hug)) smile
posted 13-Nov-2001 5:15pm  
a college/high school student sleeping with a teacher, an adult having sex with a minor, pimping/prostetution, calling some one a fata$$ or a dumba$$, driving while intoxicated, having sex against someone else's will or when they're intoxicated, killing for finacial gain or revenge, neocrophila, not telling a sexual partner about having dieseases, shoplifting, sleeping with a prostitute, smoking while pregnant, testing cosmetics on animals, suicide, canabolism, cheating on a test, cheating on an SO.
(reply to Kristal_Rose) posted 13-Nov-2001 5:21pm  
Keep in mind, people do come before animals.
posted 13-Nov-2001 8:38pm  
Exaggerating on your resume: only to a Im only semi-fluent in a language, but I say I speak it

Homosexuality: Whatever. Sexuality *period* gets on my nerves....

Telling a lie: Only if its to avoid hurting someone or a white lie...

What really gets on my nerves is ANIMAL abuse, especially hunting FOR SPORT. My friend just got a gun and went out and shot a couple birds, then let them rot....

posted 14-Nov-2001 1:02am  
Maybe I have no morality, I feel like as long as what you do,does not directly or indirectly harm someone else, put them in danger of any kind, or violate their beliefs or standards, it's ok, I guess. Hate to sound so wishy-washy, seems like the only thing that really gets people in an uproar on a personal note anymore is when ya mess their money or possessions. Anything other opinion is affected by who is around or what they want people to believe of 'em. But hey, I am just a hick.
posted 14-Nov-2001 8:29am  
Wearing Corduroy.
(reply to southernyankee) posted 14-Nov-2001 5:27pm  
Not in every faith out there. Some clans even were filters to prevent killing bugs from inhalation (though perhaps there's some self interest there). If you been in psychic bond with an animal or conversed with a maucau, you might put them on the par with children (granted, the children will grow up, but they start as complete beings in God too), and you know valor calls for saving the children first. I would probably save people before animals myself, but I surely grant them more respect than sport hunting. I admire native americans who pray for the soul of the animal while aiming their bow.
(reply to Oscar) posted 15-Nov-2001 9:20am  
This is an excellent survey and it can't be flawed. However, one person voted it bad and it was Oscar. She votes ALL surveys bad.

What a sad dog!
(reply to Kristal_Rose) posted 15-Nov-2001 4:34pm  
I don't understand the whole hunting thing myself, but I do know that many of the animals that are hunted end up being eaten. And anyway, there are very, I mean very strict laws to how one can and can not hunt. One needs licence, and there are often limits on how many animals one can kill. So you can't say that animals don't have any rights.

As far as people who were filters to prevent themselves from killing animals: I wonder if they brush their teeth or not. I wonder if they take showeres and baths. WE'RE ALL MASS MURDERERS, WE KILL BILLIONS OF INNOCENT BACTERIA EVERYDAY!!!! LOL
(reply to Kristal_Rose) posted 15-Nov-2001 5:14pm  
Jains wear masks over their mouths so they dont swallow insects and they also sweep in front of them as they walk.
(reply to anonymous) posted 16-Nov-2001 2:31pm  
Why would you talk about me instead of to me in a reply?
Excellent surveys don't go to 68% with just one vote.
Biggles Bronze Star Survey Creator
(reply to Oscar) posted 16-Nov-2001 3:28pm  
Too true!
posted 17-Nov-2001 8:51am  
I checked only a few obvious ones... Like necrophilia - weird! In others, the question of morality can be debatable given the circumstances.
posted 18-Nov-2001 1:11am  
Whether I've done any of that is beside the point.......... right?
posted 18-Nov-2001 6:08am  
There were a lot of things on here that could be judged as just plain stupid instead of immoral.And some that were more unethical than immoral.I was a little annoyed that anyone could think a person's sexuality could be immoral but screw em.I'm queer and proud.
posted 18-Nov-2001 1:22pm  
Geez, I think a LOT of things are immoral... O.o;;;
(reply to EmoKidSmiley) posted 20-Nov-2001 1:14am  
I think that homosexuality is very immoral. I'm a very religious person and most of the things on that survey were immoral. Sexual preferance being just one of them.
(reply to nosoniceguy) posted 20-Nov-2001 8:34am  
Religious bigotry being another!
(reply to Oscar) posted 20-Nov-2001 11:10am  
So why did you rate it bad?
(reply to anonymous) posted 20-Nov-2001 2:42pm  
Because I didn't realize that spidertea had made it.
(reply to Oscar) posted 21-Nov-2001 4:52am  
So, any survey not created by spidertea is worthy of a bad vote?
(reply to anonymous) posted 21-Nov-2001 8:59am  
stop putting words in my mouth
(reply to Oscar) posted 21-Nov-2001 12:22pm  
Well, what did you mean then?
(reply to anonymous) posted 21-Nov-2001 12:26pm  
I meant that I didn't pay attention before I voted.
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:12am  
early in the morning,
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:12am  
rising to the street,
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:13am  
light me up that cigarette and a strap shoes on my feet,
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:13am  
got to find a reason,
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:14am  
a reason things went wrong,
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:15am  
got to find a reason why my moneys all gone
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:16am  
but i got a dalmation,
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:16am  
i can still get high,
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:17am  
i can play the guitar like a mother fudging riot
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:18am  
well life is
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:19am  
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:19am  
so love the ones you got,
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:20am  
cause you might get run over or you might get shot
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:21am  
never had a reason to get it off my chest
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:21am  
never had to battle with my bullet proof vest
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:22am  
take a little tip take a tid-a-bit from me now
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:23am  
take all your money and give it to charity
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:25am  
loves what i got
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:25am  
its within my reach
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:26am  
and the the sublime style is still straight from long beach
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:28am  
it all comes back to you, you finally get what you deserve
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:29am  
try and test that you're gonna get served
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:29am  
love's what i got
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:30am  
don't start a riot
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:31am  
you feel it when the dance gets hot,
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:31am  
love is
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:32am  
what i got
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:32am  
i said remember that
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:33am  
love is
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:36am  
i don't cry when my dog runs away
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:37am  
i don't get angry at the bills i have to pay
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:38am  
i don't get angry when my mom smokes pot
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:41am  
hits the bottle and goes back to the rock
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:42am  
fudgein' and fightin' its all the same
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:43am  
livin' with louie's dog is the only way to stay sane
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:44am  
let the lovin'
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:45am  
let the lovin' come back to me
posted 25-Nov-2001 2:48am  
-sublime "what i got"
sublime 1996
skunk records
(reply to everglow) posted 25-Nov-2001 4:02am  
Good stuff, rules for living 'within creation'. By no means our limits of authority, responsibilty, etc. on higher planes though.
'When there's a choice between love and power, choose love', that's rule number two. [and it can get blindingly subtle yet mean the difference between heaven's and hell's] Number one is 'There's nothing but god here'. Think about that long enough and the figuring part will figure as much it will ever be able to before new capacities kick in.
Your song can be seen as let go, stay away, blow smiles while eventually crying in limbo. 'Sit back and watch unaffected' does not quite justify consciousness. At least there's the notion of sweet karma in there. Think about karma in terms of 'only God'. The stranger is jesus, the microcosm mirrors the macrocosm. What you send out comes back until you catch up to instant karma and are writing the entire script by the microsecond. When you find it was all really one mind orchestrating the clockwork for god's redundant eye's, options include detached encompassing directing or automatism satori of unobstructed joy sensation free from responsibility. The laws of time and matter can change too in pockets and planes of reality, (amongst those clockworked for the same level of belief/expectation), but the first step is observing the global mind at work.
(reply to Kristal_Rose) posted 26-Nov-2001 9:27pm  
to tell you the truth i don't believe in love. i believe in animal like affection. maybe thats just because i'm young and have never fallen in love. i think time is more of a bad thing than a good. sure its useful when you need to be somewhere but it keeps us on a chain. you fall into a pattern and then breaking the pattern becomes impossible. they did a study and a woman lived in a cave and had no idea of time and she only slept 4 hours a day and bunches of other benefits. matters just an idea
(reply to everglow) posted 27-Nov-2001 3:33am  
Vacation: Still on it, home but eyes are burning and mom came down to reremember LA and bring down tons of driftwood for we collected for my art projects.
Love: There are like 30 kinds of love. Some are unconditional (agape), others passionate (eros), infatuation, codependence, romance, etc. the best forms bubble and flow regardless of environmental situation.
Time: I've spent six days straight awake and learned a lot. I know one guy who slept 30 min a night for a couple months. My guru did 2 hr night permanently. I kept up 4hr/night for the first 3 mos of my awakening. Need for sleep is inversely proportional to spiritual love and mesmerization. I've intentionally gone back to a partial state of ignorance and ancient needs for 9 hrs though. {we need to wake you up before explaining why one would go back to sleep though} I don't live in time in several ways. Sometimes 20 minutes feels like 3 hours and vice versa. I stopped carrying a watch and paying attention to much more than moon phases and seasons years ago. (You can feel astrological changes when you develop sensitivity, esp the equinoxes (it's like a reversal of tidal flux)). Also time can halt or intersperse in both meditation and physical reality. Yogi's (I wear that label along with minister and a few others) can dig into the akashic records to find things that have happened in history.
Matter: If you like math, do limits on e=mc^2 with time as a variable. Materialization is distance from the source of creation. At the fountain source, time and matter diverge from infinite nothingness. To use the wave particle observor model, light in waves is infinite possibility; the observor chooses a reality, and bingo, a particular particle. I reversed the compass polarity of part of my living room for about a year and a half. Usually though, though I choose what events will occur in my life, they fit the laws of plausible physics. Sometimes my tea kettle lights for me or something. Yes, matter is just an idea, but why/how can 'you' claim that to be true?
posted 3-Dec-2001 11:26am  
There alot of them that I think are immoral, I think some are worse than others but there still not right.
(reply to everglow) posted 9-Dec-2001 7:35pm  
Are you from L.B.C.???
posted 20-Dec-2001 6:07pm  
There is no inherent moral or immoral.
posted 20-Dec-2001 10:44pm  
I'll do whatever I want, when I want to.
(reply to Kristal_Rose) posted 22-Dec-2001 10:54pm  
i read in an article about this woman who lived in a cave with now idea of time for a year. it ends up that she only slept 5 hours a day, she didn't have periods, and she went insane somewhere near the middle. i think that speaks for itself. usually when i'm not at school i stay up till three in the morning and wake at 7. its incredibly fun and its really weird after a while. i end up seeming awake and after long periods of time i seem to0 watch the world as it passes me by. its amazing. i seemed to observe the world from the outside. its so weird i do it sometimes on weekends. i couldn't figure that out if my life depended on it. i am not a math kind of guy. i'm more of an artistic reader. also that time is proportional is Einstein. its weird sometimes i can never the surveys from the latter day. like the conversation about buddism. i couldn't fnd it after looking through like 800 milion surveys. ha HA my surveys are starting to get as long as yours. in my opinion, a major accomplishment.
(reply to Cleo) posted 22-Dec-2001 10:55pm  
what the hell is the L.B.C?
(reply to everglow) posted 22-Dec-2001 11:02pm  
Long Beach City ............California U.S.A. smile
(reply to Cleo) posted 22-Dec-2001 11:08pm  
oh! no why do you ask? do i sound like a divorcee? its nice to talk friendly after i ripped this guy apart in one of my messages. i thought you were talking about some sort of organization
(reply to everglow) posted 23-Dec-2001 12:58am  
No No.What guy was that that you ripped apart?Hummmm,I missed that.Well,now it's been so long I forget what the comment was that was made.Probaably water bride now anyway.But really where do you live?smile
(reply to everglow) posted 23-Dec-2001 1:05am  
What I meant in the 3rd sentence was that,It's probably all water under the bridge now anyway.The reason why I asked,if you were from Long Beach,was because you mentioned "sublime" & the group SUBLIME comes from L.B.C........wel one of them,
(reply to Cleo) posted 23-Dec-2001 3:40pm  
i live in New Lenox, Illinois. Known for the biggest corn fields in America. god almighty my town is a bore. but i live near Chicago though so thats cool.yah i love sublime, though i'm not from Long Beach. they kick ass. to bad the lead singer died and they broke up though they were great. Where you from?
(reply to everglow) posted 23-Dec-2001 5:43pm  
I was born & raised in Honolulu Hawaii.
In 1975/77 my husband(then)boyfriend & I moved to Seal Beach,Cali. then later to Long Beach, 1983,my oldest boy,then still in 6th grade,attended the same school with Brian Wilson.The kid(Brian)used to be a chubby little kid,who played with my son.That's why I asked if you were from L.B.C. I thought you were one of the kids,that hung out with Brian also.

But,hey!Corn fields can be quite cool.It looks so much like the sugar cane fields in Hawaii.BTW.I got lost in the cane field once.Not any easy task to find your way out again.frown
(reply to Cleo) posted 23-Dec-2001 9:48pm  
I got lost in like 8 corn fields that were all connected. it was around 12 and i was with my friends. it took us 2 hours to get out. then we spent another 30 minutes to get through the woods. it was internal hell. your son was friends with Brian. thats awesome! Hawaii? you are so lucky. i wish i could grow up in a place that exotic. Talk about lucky.
(reply to Cleo) posted 25-Dec-2001 7:54pm  
I think people might bit a little confused by LBC. In the 22 years I lived in California, people referred to that city simply as Long Beach, including three friends who lived there for several years.
(reply to lion) posted 26-Dec-2001 12:07am  
Maybe you & your friends don't listen to Snoop Dog,that's probably why.& they probably lived in the better part of LBC.Like near & around Marina Pacifica,Belmont Shores & Naples.

"LBC" is black gangster rap terminalogy.Your friends probably aren't familiar with the Mexican gangster terminology of "EAST LONGO" either.

They would have to live in that part of Long Beach to use that slang.These hoods,are usually predominately Black or Mexican.Are your friends one of these nationalities?If they are,they should be familar with those terminoligies.& if they're not,they probably never,hung out with the hard core drug infested community.& that's a good thing!

I lived down on 7th & Anahiem,for 4 years.We had to move from there,because it got so bad,with guns going off every so often & the drive bys.We moved to north Long Beach,a few blocks from Long Beach City College.It was way better there.We ended up living there for 8 years.Total? 12 years in LBC.

Where in California do you live?

& where exactly do your friends live in Long Beach?
Tell me streets,& I can tell you exactly how nice or bad an area your friends live in. I know Long Beach like the back of my hand,& I can tell you ALL the gang infested areas,the upper middle class quarter million dollar homes,to the bourgeois mini van driving PTA mom girl scout leader white picket house areas.
(reply to Cleo) posted 26-Dec-2001 2:59am  
Ahh, that explains it -- more local slang. One was of european decent, another of latin american decent, and one was black. But all were lower-middle to upper-middle class. And yes, they did tell me of the guns that went off -- especially at midnight on New Years. They mainly lived there in the mid to late 80s - the only person I can really remember is the one friend who lived close to the Cats Mystic Eye (I can't fully remember the name of the metaphysical shop)

Again, my point is the confusion because outside of Long Beach and selected gangs, its known as Long Beach not LBC as what you probably hear everday due to a particular part of society you interact with. Its like saying you lived in 'The City' when you could be referring to San Francisco or New York.

posted 26-Dec-2001 6:08am  
I love to hunt. But if you ain't gonna eat it, don't kill it. ... Leather???... You will eat the meat of a cow, but not wear the skin???... lol
posted 28-Dec-2001 4:40pm  
hmm...nope, no problems here. keep moving.
(reply to everglow) posted 28-Dec-2001 7:37pm  
(currently on vacation) I was just telling my ally Ceilidh about the time I was planning on tunneling an underground palace back when I was spending weekends at a beautiful lagoon near the beach. People who lived there had identities like the cat woman or alligator man. When the world passes you by, is it your autobiography. Do you alter it.
Do you use the search tool? Doing buddhism, do you encounter gold magnetic bell toned energy or see visibly see the consciousness of particle matter? Those were some of the perks I found in that direction.
(reply to Kristal_Rose) posted 30-Dec-2001 2:59am  
i'll try that. what kinda a place was that i never heard of such of place. sounds like something from a video game.
(reply to everglow) posted 30-Dec-2001 7:26am  
Doesn't it. Santa Cruz, CA was a weird town, but then so is anywhere else if you know how to seek.
posted 30-Dec-2001 9:41pm  
(reply to lion) posted 30-Dec-2001 10:03pm  
Yeah,I know what you mean.....One would have to live in the general area to where that slang originated.

Like,originally I was born & raised in Hawaii.When I was a teenager there........totally different slang were used by the city teenagers.As opposed to our country cousin,teenagers.Sometimes we were like night & day in the way we spoke to one another.

But yeah,the Cats Mistic Eye sounds so familiar. I'll ask my husband he would know more about that.Is that like a book/coffee shop, down near Ocean Blvd??? Ask your friend.

& BTW you still haven't told me,were you hail from in California. I live in Murrieta in the county of Riverside. How 'bout you??
(reply to everglow) posted 30-Dec-2001 10:32pm  
Yeah!! I know the feeling,of getting lost,in something so TALL,that you can't find your way out.At first,I started to panic,then I told myself to calm down & follow the drainage ditches.
You were lucky tho,at least you were with friends.This happened to me at age 16 & I was alone.
I was really stupid & naive.This guy that I met,while attending a course at a community college,asked me if I could use a ride home,& stupid me,I said "Yeah",& he drove me to a sugar cane field,on the other side of the island,& then said he was going to have his way with me,I told him,"Okay,but I have to go pee first in private." so he said "Go behind the car." & I took off running into the cane fields.He never found me.& it took me a long time to find my way out.Not only because the cane was so tall,but because I was also hiding from this guy that wanted to rape me.I never went back to that class because of that.Eventually 2 years later,they found this guy stabbed to death in a bathroom stall at a local beach.My guess is, that he probably tried to rape the wrong girl & she killed him.

Is it your state that has the field where a farmer thought about making it into a maze & charging money?

I was trying to find my son's 6th grade year book with Brians picture in it.When I find it I'll try to post it.He was a pudgy little
posted 4-Jan-2002 1:27am  
excellent survey...
(reply to Cleo) posted 4-Jan-2002 11:04pm  
thanks that would be great. man, why can't my life be that interesting? that guy had it coming to him. i can't help but laugh. the poor bastard. wow sugar canes? where do you live again? jeez that guys pretty gullible, i wonder what the last thing that went through his head was. perhaps it was "boy i'm one fudging idiot. perhaps i have fudgeed with the wrong chick."
(reply to everglow) posted 5-Jan-2002 10:02pm  
Yep,that was my exact thought too! A lot of my other female friends, said the same thing.

I still haven't located my son's 6th grade year book yet,but then again,I haven't been looking THAT hard,for it.Only because,I'm a hopeless pack-rat.I have sooooooooo much crap around here,that things I regard as "now pending",or "needing attention now" are the only things,that I have close at hand.It's been so long,since I've seen or even thought about that year book.BUT,one of these days,I WILL have my PACK-RAT way "UNDER CONTROL",& I'll show it to you.Hopefully soon.

I live in Murrieta,California.You know,in of county Riverside? But,I was born & raised,in Hawaii as a youngster.You still haven't told me where you live in California.
(reply to Cleo) posted 8-Jan-2002 4:12pm  
Riverdale. thats where Archie and the Gang are from. i hope you find it that would be cool to see. why do girls call there friends "girlfriends". i don't call my friends my "boyfriends". that would probably be taken way out of context. you must channel the pack rat from within. maybe you have a problem with throwing things out. if someone threw something out you would violently attack them and their dead body would join the pile. wouldn't that make a good love story
posted 18-Jan-2002 8:58am  
(reply to fagerallo) posted 19-Jan-2002 2:07am  
So which do you enjoy more, the dogs or the dead people? Do you wait till their bodies rot? You're not particular about which orifice I suppose. Are you telling the truth about the teacher? You seem to be more of the 'over my dead body' type. Suicide, hmm.. giving others a chance to do as you'd do unto them. Your so ethical.
posted 20-Jan-2002 1:25pm  
   Uhh... That should have been split into three separate surveys. "What do you consider immoral", "what do you consider a crime" and "what do you consider wrong/are disgusted with". "A college student sleeping with a professor for a better grade" is immoral. "Having sex with someone against their will", in short "rape", is a crime. And "smoking tobacco while pregnant" is just wrong, I don't see how morality could be applied to it. Actually, I don't like people smoking under any circumstances, but it hardly has something to do with morality. And cannibalism? That's a hard one. I would qualify that as a mental disorder. Again, it can be immoral if you eat the dead body of someone's beloved (not having killed them, otherwise it would be a murder, not just cannibalism)... But as you're already insane, I don't think it will matter.
posted 20-Jan-2002 1:56pm  
   And zoophilia is more immoral than necrophilia? I would think otherwise. After all, animals are just animals. All that *may* constitute is cruel treatment. And those bodies belonged to people. To me it's not much different from rape. And I have a hard time telling which is worse. (My vote was that zoophilia by itself wasn't immoral, while necrophilia was.)
   I think it all depends on what sex means for you... If it's something disgusting or an act of love. Though I'm surprised that some people find it disgusting and still do it.

(reply to Vesper) posted 21-Jan-2002 3:25am  
My first car once belonged to a person (perhaps I've had some other bodies in the past too). Perhaps these days it is being used to lead Nazi parades or for a car bombing, but if so, it doesn't seem to be affecting me any. On the other hand, animals would be conscious of any harm done to them. I consider ourselves to be consciousness, not matter, therefore damage should be considered in terms of how it affects our thoughts, whethar that be physical, emotional, or psychic.
I think for some unfortunates, sex being something disgusting could make it more of a passionate taboo to break, or a more loving experience to endure. So what made you bring up the issue of sex as disgusting? I don't see anyone else alluding to it here. Have you had to overcome some reservations ingrained from childhood or something?
(reply to Kristal_Rose) posted 22-Jan-2002 3:14pm  
   About "some reservations ingrained from childhood", the reply is here, in another survey. This one is too old.
(reply to Vesper) posted 23-Jan-2002 12:29am  
I didn't really see a response that had much of anything to do with childhood aversions to sex in general (as in thinking sex is disgustusting).
(reply to spidertea) posted 23-Jan-2002 10:48am  

(reply to Kristal_Rose) posted 24-Jan-2002 4:59am  
   Not aversions, literally, "reservations I had to overcome". Do a search for the words "protective reaction" on that page. And as to aversions, that "orthodox spirit" I described there included the setting that sex is disgusting.
(reply to Vesper) posted 24-Jan-2002 5:49am  
I still haven't overcome all mine. I don't really think about organs graphically without some hesitation or discomfort. Although fantasy mingling abstractions of romance, passion, love, positions, and settings is much fun, and I have no reservations when actually having sex. I also find the thought of anal sex to gross to think about, though it's fine if others want to. Who would expect such a prude to change genders and occasionally steam the dance floors in hot attire. Somehow I associated male sexual activity, especially oral gratification, with irreverance. It took being a woman and finding that a woman could get into that sort of thing to at least accept the notion from my masculine side. My mom's the sort to joke about oral sex at a fancy dinner, so I doubt I got it from her. My step-dad was a baptist minister who was becoming a zen monk when he was in my life, and was big on absolute non-violence. I probably got it from him. I'm like a vulcan. My sexual passion is like acting in a play for conceptual/artistic amusement. Very rarely in my life do i experience genuine lust driven passion. The last time it happened I as intrigued to find that being in that state intermittently for a couple weeks totally changed my body odors. I guess testosterone is also linked to the apocrine glands somehow.
posted 24-Jan-2002 9:23am  
   About graphicalities - takes time and a drastic change in your attitude to get used.
   About irreverence - I think it can be both, for someone it's deliberate irreverence, for someone else it's not, it also depends on your attitude. Took me a year of talks with other women to believe that they can like it too though. Used to be an absolutely foreign concept to me.
(reply to Kristal_Rose) posted 24-Jan-2002 9:50am  
That was a reply *points up the thread*
(reply to Wicksy) posted 24-Jan-2002 6:21pm  
Kick ass!!!
(reply to Vesper) posted 27-Jan-2002 9:19pm  
So rape is a crime, but is not immoral?
Please explain.
(reply to spidertea) posted 27-Jan-2002 9:42pm  
   Heh... Didn't see that coming. Yes, I think morality has little to do with it. My definition for morality is "a thing that tells you whether doing something is right or wrong, when all other ways to find that out fail". In the case with rape "other ways" don't fail... It's clearly a crime, and is therefore outside of the domain of morality.
(reply to Vesper) posted 28-Jan-2002 6:50am  
So being a crime automatically puts something out of the domain of morality? I doubt you mean that there would be nothing wrong with rape if there were no law against it, and so it seems you mean that crimes are automatically considered immoral to a degree that they are beyond consideration. If this is so, then are oral sex and recreational drug use also automatically immoral?
I think you use a definition of immoral no one else is using. Immorality is one way of looking at things, laegality is another. Sometimes they concur, sometimes they do not, depending on a person's moral code. Perhaps there are people out there for which everything illegal is against their moral code, but i doubt there are many.
(reply to Kristal_Rose) posted 28-Jan-2002 8:43am  
   Well, I forgot to mention that I have my own definition of "crime" too. You can think I live in my own country with my own laws. Which are often, though not always, more strict than the laws of the country where I live physically.
   About oral sex - I don't think it's a crime in any country... I may be wrong, of course. But there's nothing wrong about it for me.
   "Recreational" drugs to me are one of the most disgusting things in the world. You can preach the blessing of group sex, or zoophilia, or incest (there seems to be a lot of surveys about it lately), or all of it together, I will be less concerned than if you start preaching drugs.
(reply to Vesper) posted 28-Jan-2002 7:55pm  
Do you include alcohol on your list? What about caffeine, nicotine, and sugar? To my dismay, I do a ton of the latter. I just put up a more recent survey on the fringe sexual interests myself. That doesn't mean I endorse them. It's simply a hot topic here lately. (wait a minute, you did one of those surveys too, didn't you?)
For the most part, I believe in traditional monogamy, because I believe sex is far more significant than mere physical gratification. I find it odd that you are more disturbed by talk of drug use than outrageous sexual behavior, but, to each their own. There are several states in the US, including my own California, in which oral sex is technically illegal. I am quite against such laws that could be used on a discretionary enforcement basis.
As far as preaching on drug use. If a person gets by without drugs, they have my blessing. On the other hand, I think a person should experience as many states of mind as possible at least once, provided the physical risk is low. As Don Juan said, once you have learned the plants lesson, there is no need to keep coming back. I don't support anyone becoming a regular user of anything. When I was younger, my drug research books quite outnumbered my unique experiences. There are only a couple drugs I would not mind my children trying. For instance, I would definitely balk if my son were to do coke more than once, and would complain if he were to drink more than a time or two per month.
Bottom line though, I would rather he be an alcoholic than bop corpses or animals, but I think I would rather he was into responsible incest or group sex than be a severe alcoholic or drug addict.
How can you have your own definition of crime (that you keep separate from morality). It serves no purpose. Unless you refer to some biblical code. The argument about morality vs crime only makes sense when one (morality) is a personal issue, and another (crime) is a common standard.
(reply to Kristal_Rose) posted 29-Jan-2002 7:42am  
   "Crime" and "morality" are both personal issues for me. And if you look, you will see that it's so for most people: why would people think that something should NOT be a crime when it legally is, or should be one when it isn't? My explanation is that they all (and you too) have their own definition of crime, and they want to change the commonly accepted definition to conform to their own.
   As to the "necessity to experience states of mind" - I just don't get it. I do understand the necessity to eat: otherwise you die. I do understand the necessity to drink: otherwise you die too. But the necessity to do drugs - where does it come from? What purpose do you claim it to serve?
   Yes, I do include alcohol on that list. I feel less strongly about nicotine because it's not a consciousness modifier. And caffeine and sugar don't belong on that list at all, they are everyone's free choices.
   You're mixing some things together... I agree with your notion of monogamy. But what does it have to do with zoophilia or incest? I can easily imagine two cousins being in a happy monogamous relationship, loving each other, and I don't see why it should be called "outrageous sexual behaviour". You know, to me it's just this: there's nothing wrong with same sex relationships. There's nothing wrong with TG people. Now, if I feel that way, it would be just hypocritical of me to think that there can something "immoral" in relationships JUST because you're genetically related. Other factors can make it immoral, but not this one.
   As to zoophilia, you're falling in the same trap as a lot of people here... For some reason many people seem to think only about the male+animal variant. Why are people so male-centered? It isn't even funny. Myself I always try to look at every situation from both sides...
   And I try to be fully logical and never stop half-way. If I find something acceptable that other people don't, I will try to find out why and apply the same reasoning to all different situations where I can. And otherwise. I would like to ban drugs, for example, not because they are harmful, but because they are conscience modifiers. I will look around, see alcohol and will want to ban it too, though it isn't usually classified as a drug (I don't remember what was first and what was second in reality though). But you see what I mean. If I dislike a particular behaviour in guys, I will dislike it in girls, though it might have seemed all right to me before. And so on.
(reply to Vesper) posted 29-Jan-2002 8:40pm  
'should be a crime' comes from ones personal morality. Crime ideally comes from the common denominator definition of morality. It's illegal to run through the streets naked because most people consider it an obectionable affront to others. I don't but I agree with the majority of laws; it is immoral to steal a pencil and therefore should be a crime.
Eating and drinking alone may be enough for animals (actually I don't even believe that) but, for humankind, I believe we are meant to make the most of our lives, learn what to transcend with and about ourselves, find the wisest most compassionate course of interacting with society, and fill the world with beauty and intrigue. To this end, not only do we eat, but we also learn many states of emotional being like seriousness, play, compassion, and ways of using our mind like intuition, engineering, artistic creativity, etc. We explore our full range of human potential by going to school, conversing with others that have different types of perceptionand worldviews, exploring beauty & nature, watching movies, listening to international music forms that require different understandings, doing meditation, having religious experiences, doing rigorous physical activity, honing attention, experiencing the 30 or so forms of love and passion, usually in conjunction with a mate or society, and several other forms of altering our consciousness, including drug usage. Only mahayana buddhism, to my knowledge, recommends one steer entirely clear of altering consciousness, while some faiths like hinduism simply alert you that your changes in consciousness (thoughts) ripple through creation. I believe that our primary assignment in life is to find the ideal form of consciousness. To do that, it helps to know what the possible range is, just as a poet is far more likely to write good poetry if they have seen some poetry before, even better if they have seen haiku and gregorian monks chants.
'everyone's free choices' - does that imply your idea of morality comes from existing common law? Does it suddenly become more moral to drink after ones 21st birthday? I wasn't mixing things. You brought up group sex, and i replied that it was a less deisirable moral situation simply because it commonly lacks virtues that generally tend to coincide with monogamy, which puts group sex in a different category than incest or zoophilia.
Perhaps, instead of the term 'outrageous', I could have used the term 'unpopular and generally condemned and disdained'. I didn't say that was my view. I too can envision a healthy love affair between cousins. I think someone having sex relationships with animals is definitely short changing themself. I give my cats caring non-sexual massages, and by extension of that thought, could, I suppose, envision something more intimate & consentual, but it sure seems desperate. Sex with corpses seems really disturbed, but I can even see that that is on the same scale of any sexual interests beyond physical intimacy, such as a taste for erotic garments or whipped cream.
I once did a survey on incest (where I imagine I must have elaboratedmy views in more depth). There certainly are other factors that can make it immoral. I don't believe they are related to blood as much as living situation though. Society should mingle, for more reasons than genetics. Genetics are an issue, if you've followed this debate; maybe not in isolated incidents, but certainly over the long course. As far as the biblical codes go, it would make sense that rules that apply to some as dictated by their birth blood, apply to all in fairness. It wouldn't do in a simple ancient culture to say that whethar or not incest was ok depended on the genetics of all involved. What was wrong for some must be wrong for all. If it were decreed right for all then there would be drastic deterioration, especially considering that in those days people were highly clannish. If few mated outside of their tribe, it was all the more critical that people didn't mate their siblings. We live in a different world now. A majority of people still exhibit what seems to be a natural revulsion to incest, and yet it's a popular theme in subliminal advertising, which suggests to me that expert psychologists understand it to be a complexity of taboo attraction or something at a deeper level, or they wouldn't be selling things with it.
As far as male-centered, hey, that's demographics. Men, for instance are far more statistically likely to cheat on their spouse. Magazine audiences are based on what people buy, not just what is sold. I spoke of the male-animal variant because that is the case in which their is cause for physical concern, and the case in which mutual consent is not guaranteed.
{in the US} Alcohol was banned at roughly the same time as narcotics. Alcohol, the gentlemans preference, with industrial backing quickly returned, but home grown plants, and the right to brew beer or distill spirits yourself, did not. President Jimmy Carter was responsible for the relegalisation of personal home brewing. Some cultures, I believe, still support halucinogens for sacred uses, but do not permit alcohol.
Did you mean to say 'conscience' modifier, or did you mean to say 'consciousness' modifier. In my experience, alcohol releases inhibitions. It is conducive to tears and emotional expression amongst those who are generally too reserved to exhibit their feelings, but it can also disinhibit one's violent sentiments. Marijuana tends to increase ones awareness and philosophical centering as well as putting people at peace, so the tendency is towards higher conscience as well as altered consciousness, although it often triggers paranoia as well. The true halucinogens, like acid and mushrooms, amplify whatever the state of ones consciousness is, whethar that be loving, lonely, creative, connected, dark, whatever. It shouldn't be done except in the best of environments with the best of sentiments. Cocaine seems to make people think they are hedonistic self-centered superhumans. I don't know much at all about all the new designer drugs. They arrived after my drug exploration period.
I know for certain that I would have vastly greater work productivity if I were on marijuana, it allows me to think about what i'm doing instead of wandering off. I understand though that this is probably not the case for the majority of people. I am still waiting for it's derivatives to become legal prescription drugs. I've tried a dozen other prescriptions (SSRI's and such), and they never helped, and often did more harm.

Being transgendered or even gay could be placed on the spectrum of consciousness altering too. Hypocritical is a relative stance. You accept deviating from common denominator thought in one genre but not others? As time goes on, I am forced to increasingly broaden my acceptance. For instance I've had spiritual experiences which induced me to interpret all sorts of things like 'inner voice' different from many others, and yet eventually I had the experiences they spoke of too, and had to conclude that there was not one path to spiritual enlightenment (the one that had proved itself to me), but probably as many legitimate distinct paths as there are people. I don't discount anything now unless it is clearly causing harm, though I will still advise people towards what has worked for me if they don't seem to have other tools of consciousness progress.
(reply to everglow) posted 7-Feb-2002 4:12pm  
February,7th Thursday 1:09pm California time.
Hey You!!!How are you,Everglow?? Guess what???? I got good news & bad news. First the GOOD NEWS! I found my oldest son's Year Book!! You know??? The one with Brian Wilsons (from "SUBLIME") picture in it. YAY!! I couldn't believe it! I wasn't even looking for it. Just so happens,I was getting so tired,of looking at the the 9 years worth of clutter,that had accumulated on my sheves,next to my computer table. Well,as I was,going through some papers,magazines,books,photos,old calendars,newspapers,,cupons,maps,clippings.......well you get the idea. There "IT" was,amoung all that

Now for the BAD NEWS,I still haven't figured out,how to scan & send pictures,from my scanner,on to the computer.frown However,after finding the book,it has encouraged me,to learn how to do it

Probably take me a few keep your finger crossed,that I figure it out quickly,cause I'm so excited,to show you,what he used to look
posted 18-Feb-2002 10:48pm  
posted 19-Feb-2002 6:44pm  
This is the best survey I have seen yet!!!!
posted 16-Mar-2002 4:50pm  
having sex with dead people....YUCK YUCK AND DOUBLE YUCK!!!!!

Someone had some WEIRD ideas...
posted 19-Mar-2002 9:49pm  
I will sum my views in one sentence as oppose to checking through this list of views.

posted 19-Mar-2002 10:16pm  
How can anyone say that two loving parents is immoral? No matter if they *are* the same gender. I just don't understand how morals or religions could possibly condem a loving family, even if that family is'nt the "ideal" one.
(reply to DeeJay) posted 28-Mar-2002 3:22pm  
I agree with you completely!
posted 6-Apr-2002 12:49am  
Yeppers. Those are my views. Take 'em or leave 'em.
posted 18-Apr-2002 11:56pm  
I say do what you wilt!
posted 22-Apr-2002 5:02pm  
The things I marked as wrong are things I try not to do, wrong for me. . .what is moral for someone else im much more flexible with. I think people have to follow their own conscience. Maybe part of what goes wrong in interactions between people is when they've surrendered their moral authority to a higher power; society, god, religion.
posted 19-May-2002 1:26pm  
I think some people do some of this stuff because they're too stupid to think of the consequences..
RaveDevil Happy Birthday to Me
posted 25-May-2002 3:10pm  
These issues I consider immoral but are not limited to what is here.
#1 Sleeping with a college prof. for better grades
#2 Sleeping with a teacher for better grades
#3 Bestiality
#4 Prostitution
#5 Cannibalism
#6 Cheating on your significant other
#7 Doing Coke
#8 Driving Drunk
#9 Divorce
#10 Rape
#11 Having sex with an intoxicated partner
#12 Homosexuality
#13 Killing another for financial gain
#14 Necrophilia
#15 Same sex marriage
#16 Testing cosmetics on animals
#17 Interracial relationships
#18 Interracial marriage
Thats would be about it, mostly what I'm against.
(reply to RaveDevil) posted 26-May-2002 1:59am  
What is the basis of your interracial opinions? Do you just not like the idea (personally), or actually consider it immoral (for everyone)? I see a bit of 'the body is a temple' theme (or possibly sanctity of sex), yet no suicide listed (probably an oversight), and not much on the 'others' concern, excepting drunk driving. I take it your're a 'keep to yourself' type.
RaveDevil Happy Birthday to Me
(reply to Kristal_Rose) posted 26-May-2002 4:02am  
My basis for feelings against interracial couples or marriage is centered around personal experience (as in interracial experiences in the family)and often times the idea that those who would ever due it have some serious mental issues. No, I would personally never do something like that, my opinion is just "one kind to their own". I know that I cannot change it from happening of course, I would just wish it wouldn't occur, too many visible problems that come out of it. And yes, you could say I'm the keep to myself type.
(reply to RaveDevil) posted 26-May-2002 5:44am  
Mentally ill? To risk adversity, experience a different culture, or not find different genes personally objectionable? or only because the example you have in mind was somewhat mentally ill, aside from the issue here. Do you find any other races physically attractive, say hawaiians, swedes, or portuguese brazilians? Do you distinguish between who you find attractive and who you would marry? I'm also uncertain on the gene/culture aspect.. like who would you be more likely to marry, someone of your identical genetics (opposite sex, of course) raised up till now by papua new guinea natives, or one of those natives raised as the girl next door, working in the same office even, and buying the same CD's and videos as you?
Personally, I'm generally more attracted at first glance to irish-german lasses, but I can imagine marrying anyone, and culture is more important to me than race. Personality is more important than either of those, and their spirit more important than that. Love is love. I believe we can love anyone, however, and so it does become a convenience to not have to spend time absorbing another culture, on the other hand, what better way to spend to our time I'm in the middle of watching a movie now about nazi/jew relationships during ww2 germany. Do you also think people should marry within their faith? I know for some people, that's more important than race, culture, or anything else.
RaveDevil Happy Birthday to Me
(reply to Kristal_Rose) posted 26-May-2002 5:06pm  
I haven't adapted to multi-culturalism as others have nor really have any wish to do so. I mostly reject anything liberal with the exception of a few issues. It's entirely people's own choice to go and date who they wish, no denying that, but it would be something I would not choose to do or wish to know about.
Personally though, to answer your question, my opinion is that people should date/marry within their own race,culture,faith,etc. Many would find this objectionable for some reason, yet, it is my opinion and belief and no one should have the right to change that.
(reply to RaveDevil) posted 27-May-2002 12:36am  
As long as your opinion doesn't infringe on others, you're welcome to think whatever you want. It would certainly be absurd to force people to marry out of the bounds of their preferences. I do think it's a matter of familiarity though. With more exposure to other races, I stopped giving them any thought on the matter, then with interracially married friends, that stopped striking me as odd too. The only reason I would say that some separation is good is that it preserves our diverse heritage. I'd hate to lose world languages, dances, customs, and such because we all became undifferentiable. I think it's cool to be irish and have jewish, iraqian, or native american friends. Otherwise, we should have stopped the diversity at adam and eve, two genders, heck we could have even just had two adams, but that would have been really dull.
RaveDevil Happy Birthday to Me
(reply to Kristal_Rose) posted 27-May-2002 3:17am  
You raise an interesting point. Also, that being part of the reason I feel that races should marry within their own, the factor of culture and heritage. I think if white were to marry white or black to marry black for instance, than that would be the best way to retain your true culture. Getting to know a guy/girl or marrying a bride/groom with the same racial background and culture. This is just my opinion on the matter. Many would agree though that multi-culturalism might effect ones own culture and heritage and to lose that after adapting to so many others.Many more would agree though that multi-culturalism is something everyone should engage in.
(reply to RaveDevil) posted 27-May-2002 4:39am  
catch ya later
posted 6-Jun-2002 6:37am  
hmmm forcing someone to do something, lying or cheating or putting others in danger about covers it.
posted 10-Nov-2006 4:09pm  
The greatest Survey Central question of all time, according to the survey score of 69.2!!!!!
posted 11-Sep-2008 5:08pm  
I don't like the word 'morality', but there are some which I ticked because I can't see any reasonable excuse for them:
Smoking tobacco while pregnant.
Hitting a child.
Capital punishment.
Corporal punishment.
Child molestation.

If you'd like to vote and/or comment on this survey, please Sign On

Link this survey:

Hits: 1 today (29 in the last 30 days)