nudity and sin

  • Thread starter Thread starter billcu1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

billcu1

Guest
I have been told that nudity itself isn’t sin. Now this might need be narrowed alittle. If one looks at nudity with intent to become aroused to me that’s lust. I am right am I not. Even if it doesn’t lead to masturbation or another obvious sexual sin. Such as sinful sex. Now what about if one looked at “scant clad” female for example. If desiring eyes are there it’s lust and a mortal sin. Or a venial sin? What was meant by “nudity is not sin” can anyone help me here?
 
billcu1 said:
I have been told that nudity itself isn’t sin. Now this might need be narrowed alittle. If one looks at nudity with intent to become aroused to me that’s lust. I am right am I not. Even if it doesn’t lead to masturbation or another obvious sexual sin. Such as sinful sex. Now what about if one looked at “scant clad” female for example. If desiring eyes are there it’s lust and a mortal sin. Or a venial sin? What was meant by “nudity is not sin” can anyone help me here?
Click to expand...
A naked body is not sinful. That’s it.
We are born naked. We take showers and have medical exams.

To appropriate the body, clothed or unclothed, as an object for one’s own pleasure, is sinful.
A human being cannot be an object for another’s pleasure.
Sin is an act, so temptation or accidental viewing is not a sin. But to look for nudity, dwell on it, put yourself in a known position to find it, for your own disordered purposes, would be sinful to one degree or another.

Pornography is grave matter. Whether or not it is mortal or not for an individual in a specific instance depends on the other circumstances.
 
clem456 said:
A naked body is not sinful. That’s it.
We are born naked. We take showers and have medical exams.

To appropriate the body, clothed or unclothed, as an object for one’s own pleasure, is sinful.
A human being cannot be an object for another’s pleasure.
Sin is an act, so temptation or accidental viewing is not a sin. But to look for nudity, dwell on it, put yourself in a known position to find it, for your own disordered purposes, would be sinful to one degree or another.

Pornography is grave matter. Whether or not it is mortal or not for an individual in a specific instance depends on the other circumstances.
Click to expand...
When I see a naked woman, or even a man for example (and I’m not homosexual) I will judge not the person inside. I do not know them. And that’s what’s important the person. But the body I see for (beauty?? or not??). Is that eros? Something the Greeks did. I believe we are not at a level of purity right now to keep from looking at nudity and lusting. Certainly not without help from the Holy Spirit. One day maybe we will be beings that can see plainer. I’m sure we will be. But not now. Not by ourselves. How much of this in my case is habit, boredom, laziness catching up IDK. Does my case sound reasonable. You say “A human being cannot be an object for another’s pleasure.” I agree it is de-humanizing. Is that the same in a marriage? A person can’t be the object of another’s pleasure? Noticing another is attractive is a negative thing? Can one take pleasure in beauty and truth. God is they say truth. And the source of beauty too.

I like horror movies. Since I’ve come into the church I haven’t really watched any. But there was some movies I watched with gore and a few scenes of nudity. No pornography but it did get an R rating. I like suspense and unexpected gore is suspenseful to me. Another story. But brief scenes like that they for some reason have to put in a movie, do they have to be avoided for sin?
 
billcu1 said:
When I see a naked woman, or even a man for example (and I’m not homosexual) I will judge not the person inside. I do not know them. And that’s what’s important the person. But the body I see for (beauty?? or not??). Is that eros? Something the Greeks did. I believe we are not at a level of purity right now to keep from looking at nudity and lusting. Certainly not without help from the Holy Spirit. One day maybe we will be beings that can see plainer. I’m sure we will be. But not now. Not by ourselves. How much of this in my case is habit, boredom, laziness catching up IDK. Does my case sound reasonable. You say “A human being cannot be an object for another’s pleasure.” I agree it is de-humanizing. Is that the same in a marriage? A person can’t be the object of another’s pleasure? Noticing another is attractive is a negative thing? Can one take pleasure in beauty and truth. God is they say truth. And the source of beauty too.

I like horror movies. Since I’ve come into the church I haven’t really watched any. But there was some movies I watched with gore and a few scenes of nudity. No pornography but it did get an R rating. I like suspense and unexpected gore is suspenseful to me. Another story. But brief scenes like that they for some reason have to put in a movie, do they have to be avoided for sin?
Click to expand...
Movies don’t need partial or full nudity for any reason. We/I was taught that it was OK to notice the beauty of the opposite sex but not dwell on it. In marriage, the beauty is still there but fades with time. And it is meant for the spouses only.

Beauty is not truth. However, there are standards of beauty, and I’ve known model beautiful women. Young girls are too often brainwashed that the shape of their bodies and how they dress is all that matters. Many of the rail thin models are not healthy examples in the literal sense. Many would fall into the category of anorexic based on height and bone structure.

What was rated R 10 years ago is not the same as an R rating today. Too much sexual immorality is let in.

Ed
 
edwest2 said:
Movies don’t need partial or full nudity for any reason. We/I was taught that it was OK to notice the beauty of the opposite sex but not dwell on it. In marriage, the beauty is still there but fades with time. And it is meant for the spouses only.

Beauty is not truth. However, there are standards of beauty, and I’ve known model beautiful women. Young girls are too often brainwashed that the shape of their bodies and how they dress is all that matters. Many of the rail thin models are not healthy examples in the literal sense. Many would fall into the category of anorexic based on height and bone structure.

What was rated R 10 years ago is not the same as an R rating today. Too much sexual immorality is let in.

Ed
Click to expand...
Beauty is something that kind of eludes me. It is in a sunrise or sunset. Yes you are right as to what the young women are told. How does beauty fade? Is it illusion? This is kind of philosophical. When I watched this movie and it was the last Saw movie. And there’s been 7 or 8. When reading the rating it said brief nudity. I really didn’t care about that but the Saw movies are real thrillers. If you like those kind of movies. I watch very little TV or movies. It’s not fit to view and there’s often no story there. How does beauty fade? Looks in time yes. But some people get more beautiful inside as time goes on. I’ve been told Catholics can watch anything except pornography. 🤷
 
billcu1 said:
Beauty is something that kind of eludes me. It is in a sunrise or sunset. Yes you are right as to what the young women are told. How does beauty fade? Is it illusion? This is kind of philosophical. When I watched this movie and it was the last Saw movie. And there’s been 7 or 8. When reading the rating it said brief nudity. I really didn’t care about that but the Saw movies are real thrillers. If you like those kind of movies. I watch very little TV or movies. It’s not fit to view and there’s often no story there. How does beauty fade? Looks in time yes. But some people get more beautiful inside as time goes on. I’ve been told Catholics can watch anything except pornography. 🤷
Click to expand...
Who told you that? There are some grossly immoral TV shows.

Ed
 
edwest2 said:
Who told you that? There are some grossly immoral TV shows.

Ed
Click to expand...
I do agree with you on this, but when it comes to even partial nudity, cursing, etc, the FCC is still extremely strict on these rules, when it comes to network, basic cable tv that is. Even though society has lowered its standards regarding these things, and most people are now more willing to accept it, it seems the FCC has not (for whatever reason?)
 
seeing a persons outside rather than their inside is normal, but we are called by God to move beyond that tendency.

About the other stuff you mention. My dad used to say, “garbage in, garbage out”.
 
mikekle said:
I do agree with you on this, but when it comes to even partial nudity, cursing, etc, the FCC is still extremely strict on these rules, when it comes to network, basic cable tv that is. Even though society has lowered its standards regarding these things, and most people are now more willing to accept it, it seems the FCC has not (for whatever reason?)
Click to expand...
Let’s just put it this way. One way to see how degrading our TV shows have become is to use a simple measuring stick. My measuring stick in this case is “The Simpsons”. Now, “The Simpsons” have not gotten less offensive over the years (if anything, the show has gotten ever-so-slightly more offensive). But the other sitcoms on TV have gone from “The Cosby Show”, “Full House”, and “Family Matters” to “Frasier”, “Friends”, and “Will and Grace” to “How I Met Your Mother”, “Two Broke Girls” and “The Big Bang Theory”. Oh, and by the way, most (if not all) of the shows that I just listed played (or even still play), at one time or another, at the 8 PM Eastern/Pacific and 7 PM Central/Mountain time slots on Big 4 (ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox) network TV during the first run of the show.

Seriously, does anyone really think that “How I Met Your Mother”, “Two Broke Girls” and “The Big Bang Theory” are at all appropriate for children? The first two pretty much encourage promiscuity (almost all of the main characters in the two shows are very sexually promiscuous) and all three talk constantly about sex. Yet they all have played (and the latter two shows still do play) at a time where many children, especially in the Central and Mountain time zones, are easily still awake.
 
Much depends I think , on the Circumstances and State of mind ,
I had seen my Step daughter in varying states of Dress or lack of,
And doesn’t have the slightest impact on me whatsoever ,
But I can see a nice looking lady at the Shops and I Stare,
Best to Self Analyse and Question your own thoughts 🙂
 
powerofk said:
Let’s just put it this way. One way to see how degrading our TV shows have become is to use a simple measuring stick. My measuring stick in this case is “The Simpsons”. Now, “The Simpsons” have not gotten less offensive over the years (if anything, the show has gotten ever-so-slightly more offensive). But the other sitcoms on TV have gone from “The Cosby Show”, “Full House”, and “Family Matters” to “Frasier”, “Friends”, and “Will and Grace” to “How I Met Your Mother”, “Two Broke Girls” and “The Big Bang Theory”. Oh, and by the way, most (if not all) of the shows that I just listed played (or even still play), at one time or another, at the 8 PM Eastern/Pacific and 7 PM Central/Mountain time slots on Big 4 (ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox) network TV during the first run of the show.

Seriously, does anyone really think that “How I Met Your Mother”, “Two Broke Girls” and “The Big Bang Theory” are at all appropriate for children? The first two pretty much encourage promiscuity (almost all of the main characters in the two shows are very sexually promiscuous) and all three talk constantly about sex. Yet they all have played (and the latter two shows still do play) at a time where many children, especially in the Central and Mountain time zones, are easily still awake.
Click to expand...
Yes, that is the problem. Actors modeling bad behaviors as neutral, common, average or even good. What we put into our heads - what we see and hear - matters. Year after year, the writers and producers add a little more poison, spiritual and mental poison, and it is harmful and to be avoided.

The TV show “Mom” is extremely dysfunctional.

Ed
 
powerofk said:
Let’s just put it this way. One way to see how degrading our TV shows have become is to use a simple measuring stick. My measuring stick in this case is “The Simpsons”. Now, “The Simpsons” have not gotten less offensive over the years (if anything, the show has gotten ever-so-slightly more offensive). But the other sitcoms on TV have gone from “The Cosby Show”, “Full House”, and “Family Matters” to “Frasier”, “Friends”, and “Will and Grace” to “How I Met Your Mother”, “Two Broke Girls” and “The Big Bang Theory”. Oh, and by the way, most (if not all) of the shows that I just listed played (or even still play), at one time or another, at the 8 PM Eastern/Pacific and 7 PM Central/Mountain time slots on Big 4 (ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox) network TV during the first run of the show.

Seriously, does anyone really think that “How I Met Your Mother”, “Two Broke Girls” and “The Big Bang Theory” are at all appropriate for children? The first two pretty much encourage promiscuity (almost all of the main characters in the two shows are very sexually promiscuous) and all three talk constantly about sex. Yet they all have played (and the latter two shows still do play) at a time where many children, especially in the Central and Mountain time zones, are easily still awake.
Click to expand...
I never really watched any of those shows. But look at “Modern Family”. Sofia Vergara is the only part worth watching. 🙂 Hollywood is a dispicable institution. I do like to watch this show. Regularly.

animalplanet.com/tv-shows/river-monsters

I think it’s ok

Bill
 
billcu1 said:
I never really watched any of those shows. But look at “Modern Family”. Sofia Vergara is the only part worth watching. 🙂 Hollywood is a dispicable institution. I do like to watch this show. Regularly.

animalplanet.com/tv-shows/river-monsters

I think it’s ok

Bill
Click to expand...
Sofia Vergara the actress or the subject of prurient interest? It is neither “Modern” nor functional regarding the “Family” part.

It’s not OK.

Ed
 
edwest2 said:
Sofia Vergara the actress or the subject of prurient interest? It is neither “Modern” nor functional regarding the “Family” part.

It’s not OK.

Ed
Click to expand...
When I said OK I mean the show in the Link. The homosexual couple is what’s new in particular here.
 
billcu1 said:
When I said OK I mean the show in the Link. The homosexual couple is what’s new in particular here.
Click to expand...
Well yeah, Modern Family is trying to make it normal to have an openly gay family member and one who flaunts it. They even showed them adopting a baby, so everyone could look at them and say, “well they are doing the right things, they are good people living good lives, even though they are gay”.

Ed mentioned the simpons in a post above, I agree this is probably a good ‘measuring stick’ as they have been on air so long, but one thing I have noticed about the Simpsons, especially true with the newer ones, the characters tend to always make the ‘right’ choices, example would be one episode I saw, Homer had a chance to cheat on Marge and she would have never found out, but in the end, he choose to remain faithful, there are some other episodes when certain characters are faced with moral dilemmas and from what Ive seen they always choose what is good and right, which is strange in itself, as Im sure Hollywood could care less if people want to cheat on their spouses, Id even expect them to promote that view, but when it comes to the simpsons, for some reason, they do not do this???
 
mikekle said:
Well yeah, Modern Family is trying to make it normal to have an openly gay family member and one who flaunts it. They even showed them adopting a baby, so everyone could look at them and say, “well they are doing the right things, they are good people living good lives, even though they are gay”.

Ed mentioned the simpons in a post above, I agree this is probably a good ‘measuring stick’ as they have been on air so long, but one thing I have noticed about the Simpsons, especially true with the newer ones, the characters tend to always make the ‘right’ choices, example would be one episode I saw, Homer had a chance to cheat on Marge and she would have never found out, but in the end, he choose to remain faithful, there are some other episodes when certain characters are faced with moral dilemmas and from what Ive seen they always choose what is good and right, which is strange in itself, as Im sure Hollywood could care less if people want to cheat on their spouses, Id even expect them to promote that view, but when it comes to the simpsons, for some reason, they do not do this???
Click to expand...
Your ¶ 1 makes me think of this in the Catechism CCC 2284-7
 
billcu1 said:
Your ¶ 1 makes me think of this in the Catechism CCC 2284-7
…I was bound not with the iron of another’s chains, but with my own iron will. The enemy held my will; and of it he made a chain and bound me. Because my will was perverse it changed to lust, and lust yielded to become habit, and habit not resisted became necessity.
Click to expand...
Been there done that and have the scars to prove it.
There is hope and healing availble in the patient practice of virtue
 
My measuring stick is “Gunsmoke.”
Well, not really, but any time an actor starts taking his gunbelt and hat off, I get on my guard. I don’t watch any TV except science fiction, which is pretty clean for the most part. And Westerns, except they don’t make those any more.

.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top