It has been stated in correct translations of First Corinthians 7:1-5 that though it is good for a man to not touch a woman, both genders should have their own spouse and corresponding connections only with them. Most men are fortunate enough to have at least one they consider themselves and are considered married to to avoid temptation. One application of a paraphrased Lord's Prayer would be: "Lead us not into demonically-enticing visual-assault seduction, but deliver us for pateintly-prepared legitimate marital copulation."
Indeed, in view of the polygamy of Old-Testament patriarchs, abstinence against and away from sex is clearly NOT the allowable answer. Abstinence away from and against anti-Biblical prudes who despise erotic companionship is, of course, quite understandable and noble.
Rather than 'abstinence' (or put another way: NON-reasonable "self-control," or sadistic frigid deprivation), what is desired is: [pre-marital and marital] chastity leading to marriage.....to and with at least one wife or concubine.
Contemplate answering the following question with a "sort of" or "no:"
WERE the very first RECORDED words of GOD the Triune Creator to humanity [in Genesis 1:28] in essence:
"Be sacred sexual "predators." Righteously prowl around in sensual safaris to search for and hunt down sexually-starving voluntary victims for erotic pleasure when married to them. Maritally "molest" -with gentle affection at least one choice consensual opposite-gender target to fondly "assault" who seriously needs sensual satisfaction. Gaze, with titillating gratification, the erectile-motivating movements of your own [nude]-spouse exhibitionist who "flagrantly" flaunts her non-relenting and overpowering:
More Scripturally, did the Morality-Cognizant Triune GOD (by 66-book-Bible subjects-matter inference) in Genesis 1:28) implore men (created in the morality-cognizant image of God and having body, spirit, and soul unlike lower lifeforms having merely body and spirit without eternal destinies of heaven nor hell).....to shamelessly (Genesis 2:25) uncover all the nakedness of young women (Leviticus 18, Ezekiel 16:6 and 23, Isaiah 47:1-4, Hosea 2:2-3, KJV's First Timothy 5:14), gaze at those bared body parts (Job 31:1, Song 7:1-5), then mount them to fondle their breasts and nipples (Proverbs 5:19, Song 7:6-9, Ezekiel 23:21), and finally Lay with and/or go into their exposed secret parts (Isaiah 3:17) between which their bare feet were parted (Song 5:13, Jeremiah 2:25, Ezekiel 16:25)....inserting the seizable male member (Deuteronomy 25:11) into any one of three large holes in the female human body, as from their bared rear end (Isaiah 20:4) as they have seen positioning and positioned mammals do with their penises, to ejaculate (Ezekiel 23:19-20) using a previously-mentioned male-human private part which was taken hold of (Deuteronomy 25:11-12) by the birthday-suit-nude (Job 1:21) wife or concubine and slid into the mouth of the womb (RSV's Hosea 13:13)?
Now, before you jump upon me with passionately-hot self-righteous embarrassed indignation, and in all fairness to the LORD, His exact words were more like: "Multiply and fill the earth..." But was He not thus inferring and is yet inferring: "Have sex!!! Let's get on with the clothes-less total-nudity-already-provided fellatio and fucking (please pardon me, but I do not use the word as a condemnatory expletive of immorality but instead to signify gentle marital coital connection in 'private'), so as to fulfill the [here-correctly-translated] KJV rendition of First Timothy 5:14 where it states:
'I therefore want younger women (Gr. ne(o)teras) to marry, bear children, manage the house, and give the adversary no cause to revile us.'
Even in the cases of multiple-wives-and-concubines Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon, etc. and with the not-for-bishops-nor-deacons polygamy-allowed inferences of Saint Paul found in First Timothy 3:2,12 and Titus 1:6, it is interesting to note the preference and predominance of only one female per man, particularly for blood-line geneologies (e.g. Sarah not Hagar, Rachel not Leah nor Jake's other two concubines, Hannah not her rival, Bathsheba of Davy's many wives and concubines for Solomon, one of Solomon's 1000 women for Rehoboam, and so forth).
Nevertheless, the discrepant KJV mistranslation of Ecclesiastes 2:8 is thankfully replaced with the inerrant true-to-the-ben-Asher Hebrew Text English wording of: "I got for myself many concubines - man's delight."
That adds more categories to the description of kinfolk identities:
To a son or daughter of a father which father loses his wife by her death and he marries another, the new woman is a step-mother, as is the case if the father divorces the child's natural mother and marries a never-before-married or divorced woman, as is the case if the father acquires an additional wife or concubine while his primary first wife he is yet married to is alive, as is almost the case if the father commits adultery with whoever with or without pregnancy resulting. In the latter case, the pregnant one would have to become married to the adulterous father (if he was yet married to a living woman) before that woman would become step-mom to the kids.
Such differentiation would be extended to in-the-same-blood-line for uncles and aunts, nephews and nieces......contrasted with not-in-the-same-bloodline by-marriage-related (including by death, by divorce, by polygamy) for uncles-in-law, aunts-in-law, nephews-in-law, and nieces-in-law.
Having mentioned multiple-wife/concubine polygamy as the exception rather than the rule, monogamy with one woman alone is typical, admirable, safer, less expensive, and less time-consuming. As Malachi 2:1-16 puts it:
1 "And now, priests, this command is for you.
2 If you will not listen, if you will not lay it to heart to give glory to my name, says the LORD of hosts, then I will send the curse upon you and I will curse your blessings; indeed I have already cursed them, because you do not lay it to heart.
3 Hey, I will rebuke your offspring, and spread dung upon your faces, the dung of your offerings, and I will put you out of my presence.
7 For the lips of a priest should guard knowledge, and men should seek instruction from his mouth, for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.
8 But you have turned aside from the way; you have caused many to stumble by your instruction; you have corrupted the covenant of Levi, says the LORD of hosts,
11 Judah has been faithless, and abomination has been committed in Israel and in Jerusalem; for Judah has profaned the sanctuary of the LORD, which he loves, and has married the daughter of a foreign god.
12 May the LORD cut off from the tents of Jacob, for the man who does this, any to witness or answer, or to bring an offering to the LORD of hosts!
13 And this again you do. You cover the LORD's altar with tears, with weeping and groaning because he no longer regards the offering or accepts it with favor at your hand.
14 You ask, "Why does he not?" Because the LORD was witness to the covenant between you and the wife of your youth, to whom you have been faithless, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant.
15 Has not the one God made and sustained for us the spirit of life? And what does he desire? Godly offspring. So take heed to yourselves, and let none be faithless to the wife of his youth.
16 "For I hate divorce, says the LORD the God of Israel, and covering one's garment with violence, says the LORD of hosts. So take heed to yourselves and do not be faithless."
Speaking of at least chastity (NOT 'abstinence') in singular-spouse monogamy, Saint Paul added this in First Corinthians 7 verses 1 through 5:
1 Now concerning the things whereof you all wrote to me: It is good for a man to not touch a woman.
2 Nevertheless to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband.
3 Let the husband give to the wife appropriate affection, and likewise also the wife to the husband.
4 The wife has not power over her own body, but the husband; and likewise also the husband has not power over his own body, but the wife.
5 Withhold not yourselves from each other, unless it be with consent temporarily, that you all may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not through lack of self-restraint.
IF Willard "Mitt" Romney becomes the GOP Presidential candidate, I hereby promise that:
1. I will NOT vote for him.
2. I will NOT give him any money.
3. I will NOT campaign for him.
4. I will love it when subversively-socialistic kooks on talk radio and MSNBC ridicule Romney.
5. I will use the internet to the max to try to convince others to do the previous four things mentioned.
Obama had one American parent --singular -- his mother at the time of his birth (though she declared on post-BHO-birth passport application that she planned to indefinitely move to and stay in Indonesia). BHO's father was a citizen of Kenya, and a subject of Great Britain.
Obama's mother, Ann, who was visiting in Kenya got into labor pains while swimming in the ocean near Mombasa Kenya and was rushed to emergency childbirth facilities at Coast Province General Hospital in Mombasa Kenya where she birthed her son Barack Hussein Obama (now purportedly presumed to be "the president" of the United States).
In fact, however, Barack Hussein Obama was - at birth - a citizen of Kenya, and a subject of Great Britain -- being that Obama Sr. (BHO's father) was a citizen of Kenya, never an American citizen, and had been studying in Hawaii on a visa.
Right after Obama's birth in Kenya, Ann Durham (Obama's mother) flew to Washington State then transported herself and Obama to Hawaii where she dishonestly (but "legally"?) registered her son Barack Hussein Obama as having been born in Hawaii.
Obama's American-citizen parent, Ann Dunham, had been required to have been a resident of the United States for 10 years, at least five of which were over the age of 14. Turned-Indonesian-citizen Dunham did not meet that requirement (of the Nationality Act of 1940, revised June 1952) until her 19th birthday in late November of 1961, almost four months after Obama was born.