|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 12:58 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 2:54 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 3:36 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 4:42 pm
 |
|
|
 |
Jungle Boots such as male humans with female sona's, or the other way around and even to the point at which some of them take that effeminance to the next level in getting a female fursuit. I know so many males that prefer to be called females,
Those are just the furry equivalent to crossdressers. Guys who feel just as comfortable, if not more, dressing like a woman.
I'm so attracted to the female form if my main fursona wasn't the embodiment of my inner rage at humanity, prejudice, greed, oppression, and human suffering, it'd be a lesbian chick who enjoys muff diving. biggrin
shoki_de_nai dog ******** class="clear">
I remember hearing about some furry con where one furry described seeing some zoo fetishes that had a dog with them, the guy describing the scene could only wonder what would happen to the poor canine. Being a dog lover if I heard of the suffering of a dog at this upcoming con I will go Hulk rage at the con and they'll have to kick me out because I would have killed/maimed several people and destroyed s**t.
The fandom does attract some bizzare fetishes, though. Must be the whole "Tolerance" vibe the fandom has... if you're tolerant enough to believe you're an animal, tolerant enough to hang out with a bunch of gay geeks, then you're tolerant enough to accept ANYTHING.
Garek Maxwell shoki_de_nai people who think they have the soul of an ancient dragon Furries and ancient civilizations (And the unenlightened people in poor countries) are just freakin' crazy. Thank God Christianity showed people the true way was through HIM (not HER nor multiple people nor animals nor "spirit guides"!) and that your soul is HUMAN ONLY. Remember, Jesus loves all! ...But some more than others! (Like the West!) heart
That's assuming there's a soul in the first place.
Souls can't be scientifically proven, so let's just assume that we do have souls. Since we are all genetically human in general, despite minor chromosomal differences, this would mean that any soul that resides in ourselves is human as well.
Unless you believe in some Buddhist reincarnation beliefs that we could have been an animal in a previous life (and could be one in the next life if we're bad enough). Or you're of a native american/other primitive tribe that believes in spirit guides or animal souls, which I doubt even 1% of furs could trace their ancestors to a tribal culture.
In any case that's only if you actually believe in souls in the first place. And I doubt, considering dragons and griffins actually exist, your soul could be from an imaginary creature such as a dragon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:06 pm
|
|
|
|
I made a long reply which can actually be summarized with the phrase "who died and made you god?" razz
Feel free to skip all the stuff below.
Psycho Lee Souls can't be scientifically proven, so let's just assume that we do have souls. Since we are all genetically human in general, despite minor chromosomal differences, this would mean that any soul that resides in ourselves is human as well.
Or noooot~! heart
Pretty sure there's at least some people that see the soul as something not animal (nor human, if you want to separate the two). Instead, they see it as some sort of energy that is beyond the physical.
My argument though is that when it comes to religion anything goes. No one has any kind of authority here. Putting up artificial boundaries or rules is the first step to making a religious belief. Saying "no, this can't happen because ___" is the same as saying "you can't believe this because my religion says ____".
Psycho Lee Unless you believe in some Buddhist reincarnation beliefs that we could have been an animal in a previous life (and could be one in the next life if we're bad enough). Or you're of a native american/other primitive tribe that believes in spirit guides or animal souls, which I doubt even 1% of furs could trace their ancestors to a tribal culture.
I can trace my ancestry back to Cherokee. Can't draw upon native casino funds though. Don't really wanna either. I also have Irish heritage, which goes back to similar beliefs. English heritage potentially goes back to Vikings (Normans), as well as to the Anglo Saxons. They had (broadly speaking...) beliefs of calling upon animal spirits and things considered nonsense today (instead, we invoke the powers of the clover and God! surprised ). I have Greek heritage, which puts me with both ancient Greeks but also potentially the Turks. Romans may also be in the mix from all over Europe, meaning a potential line back to even the Etruscans.
A huuuuge stretch? Not really. How far back do you go when it comes to heritage? Some very rare people can trace it back rather far... I wouldn't be surprised if some could trace their lineage back to the middle ages. There were plenty of pagans during that period, and many pagan beliefs were combined with Christian ones as well.
However, in the end, why can't they be "correct" religions? Christians often go on about how they have found "the truth" and that you should convert. Do these religions no longer apply because so few believe in them and don't have the fervor Christians have for converting others?
I also want to present the arguement that it is possible that the "correct religion" has yet to be discovered or may never be discovered. Why too can't ancient religions be right?
Psycho Lee And I doubt, considering dragons and griffins actually exist, your soul could be from an imaginary creature such as a dragon.
Invisible sky man at war with a talking snake is a big stretch for people too. A surprising number around the world believe this though. This, coming from a (barely) Christian.
I only ask, why is one belief ridiculed when another of equal validity is considered acceptable (considering there is no evidence for or against anything)?
In one instance, someone "invokes an animal guide or spirit" for strength in trying times. In another instance, someone else prays to a monotheistic religion for the same. One is seen as a loon, the other as "sane". Funny enough, when one person doesn't eat pork because their religion forbids it and another doesn't because they don't believe in harming animals, the second is criticized more often then not.
I should make it clear before I post this that this is not an argument against religion at all. I do think there should be more rationality and logic when it comes to people and religion (namely the actions taken in the name of religion), but beyond that I don't see why it's anyone's business to criticize someone's beliefs as if they knew "the truth".
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 10:23 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 10:47 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 10:51 pm
|
|
|
|
Garek Maxwell Quintessence Amg, I just read this quote out of context and wrote an ungodly long analysis of why it doesn't makes sense for Christians to look down on a harmless personal belief on the soul's nature, whether or not they think it is plausible. I checked back to make sure my ramblings actually stayed on topic (I'm wordy, I ramble. ;_ wink and saw the full post. Gaaah, I feel dumb. XD It was a friggin' polite argument, too! Awww, I'm sorry I caused that then. sad I don't often write those sorts of things, so yeah... sweatdrop Believe me, I didn't enjoy writing it since it reminds me too much that there are people like this in the world. gonk But I appreciate the effort you put in to your post that never was! I can be wordy too, so I don't mind. :3
I kind of just want to dump it in the chatterbox so it wouldn't be wasted. XD But I think it would end up giving me more pain than lulz. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
