| |
[這篇文章最後由mensch在 2004/11/16 09:44pm 第 1 次編輯]rS/
下面引用由GoGoCat在 2004/11/14 04:19pm 發表的內容：zH
I have to say that I can not agree with this article. All the so called "facts" are not having any proof at all. It's compelety insulte all the monks and nuns. The one who wrote ...Lj04[=
|
|
6z4{
©緣生術數研究社 -- 術數研究 ,$6){
You have the right to disagree to and consider it bullshit, however, I also have the right to question your comprehension.5kNr>w
©緣生術數研究社 -- 術數研究 :t
About 'facts', Bible has the same problem. Imagine the political influence being brought into it...A
©緣生術數研究社 -- 術數研究 8*:n
However, I do agree, it's too cynical to claim 神父修女和尚尼姑總是滿腦子0X^
性欲. Not all, but probably quite some.W @
©緣生術數研究社 -- 術數研究 DiPb\
Actually, the main point is not sexuality of monks and nuns, but some kinds of religious belief and practice. Leading a life in monestary should be absolutely voluntary, yet who later return to the community of common people are usually oppressed....,
©緣生術數研究社 -- 術數研究 O?Z
Besides, the depersonification (and "sanctification") of Maria is another focus./d
©緣生術數研究社 -- 術數研究 faQE
Well, Osho is such a controversial master.~]fE5x
| | |
|
|
|
頂端 
加到"我的最愛"
主題管理：
總固頂 
取消總固頂 
短訊息
查看
搜尋
通訊錄
引用
回覆
只看我
UL'PR
2004/11/13 11:18pm 
IP: 已設定保密
