Is it ok for a woman to wear a bikini to the beach?

[JrChurch]

No...that's not my standard. I am simply asking JrChurch to be consistent in how he applies his own standards.

And what are JrChurch's standards?  Has JrChurch given a position on standards?  I strongly encourage people to get their standards from the Lord, from His word, from the convicting power of the Holy Spirit.  I don't care what you wear (something I clearly stated.)  I care what I wear and what my family wears.  That is where my business ends.  Yet, people seem to think their opinions should be written on stone tablets.  Opinions based on false assumptions are especially worthless. 

 

[JrChurch]

1 Corinthians 3:16  Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

1 Corinthians 3:17  If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

1 Corinthians 6:19  What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

2 Corinthians 6:16  And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Psalms 90:1  Lord, thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations.

So we shouldn't sleep with prostitutes...got it.

I seriously doubt that you "got it" because I Cor. 3 and 2 Cor. 6 have no mention of harlots.  The mention of a harlot in I Cor 6 is a serious admonition. By your reasoning, you would not have to heed 1 Corinthians 6:20  "For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's." as long as you don't consort with harlots. 

 

[brianb]

lol.  Bikinis are immodest.  Let's be honest about our sexuality and carnality. 

Nunamybidness who wears them, but let's not pretend that they're modest.

Just because some lines are different in different cultures, doesn't mean there are no lines.

Ok.  So you've got me stuck between a rock and a hard place.  Yes, I posted that sometime back.  Let my explain my position and also say that I don't expect anyone else here to be convinced by it.  But here it is--

I do believe that I am required to conduct myself according to the Word of God in every area of life.  This includes how I worship, what I wear and what I listen to.  That is my main operating principle.

In carefully searching the scripture, I do find that it has a lot to say by way of application about what I may listen to.  I am to avoid "filthy communication."  I am not to delight myself in things that glorify and extoll sinful behavior.  I am to think on things that are good, wholesome, beautiful.  Others may disagree with me here, but I do not see that only "Christian" art (include music here) may be enjoyed-- but at the same time, the other parameters still apply.  Finding "rock" music that does not glorify sinful conduct is quite a challenge, and quite honestly, my record collection is indeed very slim.  But what I do have, I do enjoy, but never want to use my liberty as an opprtunity for another to stumble.  And as always, I strive to be humble and teachable-- always ready to lay it aside as soon as I am convicted by another brother or by the Holy Spirit by the means of the scripture that it does indeed bring a reproach upon Christ by disobedience to His Word.  IOW, I hold it very lightly.

Now in applying my music tastes to the worship of God-- I simply don't.  God regulates His worship by His Word, and nothing that He has not permitted is to be permitted in corporate worship.  Singing in worship is to consist of "psalms, hymns and spiritual songs," sung corporately (not by a performer or by performers) in a way suited to worshiping the eternal King of Kings.  Simply put the music of the world has no place in the corporate worship of God.

I agree to an extent and this is how I view art as well, but I think I am more careful about the standard that says, "glorify sinful behavior."

I watch a lot of shows that depict sinful behavior, but do not glorify it.  By that I mean, they depict fallen people in a fallen world making fallen choices and show the consequences of those decisions.  Glorifying sinful behavior would be more akin to showing sin and making it seem enticing and pleasurable without showing any consequences of those actions, IMO.

Showing sinfulness and the consequences of it glorify God by showing the goodness of His love for us in giving us His laws and commands.

I wonder how many know why it is called a bikini - it's named after Bikini Atoll where Americans did nuclear tests - obviously not inhabited so there's no reason to think it was named that because of what native women were wearing. A bikini isn't simply a two piece - they had two pieces before the bikini. Back then women were happy with the old two-piece. They didn't complain and demand that someone make a smaller swimsuit - that was a business decision. If you compare the clothes that were invented by men for women and the clothes invented by women for women there is a difference in why they were invented. Bloomers (a predecessor to pants) for example were invented for practicality and to allow women to do things like ride horses and bicycles modestly. Bikinis were not about that at all. Those Olympic Beach Volleyball players will tell you that their bikinis are more practical and comfortable than what the men are wearing but they would gladly change to what indoor volleyball players wear if men didn't care so much about what they wore - a lot of guys find the indoor volleyball shorts sexy any ways or at least what is in the shorts. The only reason guys prefer to watch Olympic Beach Volleyball is because the bikini bottoms tend to ride up - guys would get bored with it if that didn't happen and they just kept in place like lycra volleyball shorts do. Personally I don't find athletic women more attractive than naturally thin women - people assume naturally thin women are weak or lazy - they're not - I know someone who is naturally thin and she's pretty tough - athletes are over-rated.

 

[brianb]

No...that's not my standard. I am simply asking JrChurch to be consistent in how he applies his own standards.

And what are JrChurch's standards?  Has JrChurch given a position on standards?  I strongly encourage people to get their standards from the Lord, from His word, from the convicting power of the Holy Spirit.  I don't care what you wear (something I clearly stated.)  I care what I wear and what my family wears.  That is where my business ends.  Yet, people seem to think their opinions should be written on stone tablets.  Opinions based on false assumptions are especially worthless.

I just noticed that he thought you were a "he".

I didn't see any one saying that a woman "should" wear a bikini as if that is the new standard. The original question was is it ok for a woman to wear a bikini at the beach. Maybe a better question that would require deep thought would be what does God think of a woman wearing a bikini at the beach especially a beach with lots of young healthy straight guys?

 

[rsc2a]

Someone women do spend a lot of money to make their bodies look a certain way like on a tummy tuck to look better than other women. It is certainly wise to take care of our bodies but not obsessively.

You know...sometimes abdominoplasties (tummy tucks) are performed for reasons other than sheer vanity.  But it's kinda hard to castigate an particular "sin" when you have to make exceptions, isn't it? :

I know. That's why added the words "to look better than other women" - those are the key words there. Health reasons is a different matter. Many women however who get a tummy tuck are pretty healthy any ways and are looking for an easy alternative to exercise.

Ahh! But what if they get it for medical reasons AND to look better? Getting a little harder to judge them then, isn't it?

These are just generalizations - I'm not judging any one. Every one has different reasons for getting a tummy tuck or whatever. Usually when someone says they got a tummy tuck they don't say they got it for health reasons. I don't have a problem with someone getting one if exercise won't work for them - this is especially true if they are obese and not just a little overweight. I've never seen any one at the gym who was obese - I have seen some "overweight" people but not obese. It's can be dangerous for someone like that to exercise especially the way I do - they would have to some type of surgery to make it easier to exercise. More people who are not obese now are getting into exercise because they know surgery can't replace that - it's also much cheaper. Medically unnecessary cosmetic surgery is not only expensive but a foolish way to spend money. Btw, when I go to the gym I do it for strength building - I don't focus on achieving a look. I think people should accept themselves the way they are. If they are healthy and not in the modelling or fitness business they should not be trying to look like a super-model or even a fitness model. There are few people who I would even consider to be immodest or obsessed with their looks. Even at the gym they don't look "that" good. The average person doesn't even care too much about their bodies. Most people just want to look healthy and decent - they don't want to try and look better than others because life is too short to worry about those things.

Actually, if an individual is obese, they shouldn't get a tummy tuck. Tummy tucks are for people who only are basically at their goal weight (i.e. already lost their weight) and/or to repair muscles damaged during pregnancy.

And you may think it is a foolish way to spend money but I'm sure others thing that things you enjoy are foolish ways of spending money. To each their own.

 

[rsc2a]

1 Corinthians 3:16  Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

1 Corinthians 3:17  If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

1 Corinthians 6:19  What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

2 Corinthians 6:16  And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

Psalms 90:1  Lord, thou hast been our dwelling place in all generations.

So we shouldn't sleep with prostitutes...got it.

I seriously doubt that you "got it" because I Cor. 3 and 2 Cor. 6 have no mention of harlots.  The mention of a harlot in I Cor 6 is a serious admonition. By your reasoning, you would not have to heed 1 Corinthians 6:20  "For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's." as long as you don't consort with harlots.

My partial apologies. (regarding 1 cor 3 and 2 cor 6)

And, your follow-up statement is absurd.

 

[christundivided]

Pro 11:22  As a jewel of gold in a swine's snout, so is a fair woman which is without discretion.

The answer is "No."

No, I generally don't have a problem with lusting over swine's snouts.

You're funny.... It appears you're taking the "avoid the question at all costs" approach....

Don't you feel silly by making "discretion" about a "bikini". Is that the ONLY application you're going to make. Maybe I hit a never with your possible with like "expensive" looking woman.... As long as they don't wear a bikini... I assume you feel they are just fine for you...

 

[christundivided]

Have you ever looked at a beautiful "expensive" looking women and had an "immodest" thought?

No not that I can recall

Would you apply the same logic you detailed above to that same situation?

All lust is sinful

If not, then why not?

See above

Do you have any "expensive" looking women that attend your church?

No, not that I can think of.  We have an extraordinarily godly sort

Do you have the same bravado toward their "expensive" look as you do toward someone that would wear a bikini?

See above

Somehow I don't believe this...

What do you consider "expensive"? Gucci?

 

[christundivided]

Oh come on.... You can do it. I asked a simple question... surely you can answer.

Its is abundantly clear that "modest apparel" in 1 Tim 2:9 is about looking "expensive".

Have you ever talked about women wearing "expensive" apparel before? or have you had immodest thoughts toward women wearing "expensive" clothes?

It is a broad statement that addresses attire for the specific purpose of attracting attention to oneself.  That would include attire that is needlessly expensive, gaudy, indecent, or attire completely out of place.  Simply because the example utilized in that particular Scripture emphasizes only one specific application of the term does not change its definition or limit its application.

An Amish woman's attire and the basic bikini clad beach bunny may be equally immodest, just not in the same way.  The Amish woman attires herself to attract the attention of perfect strangers (tourists), and the beach bunny attires herself to attract the attention of perfect strangers (tourists).  The bikini adds lewdness to the equation, however, that the Amish woman's attire likely doesn't.

A bikini, and the accompanying emphasis on a bikini-body,  is about turning heads (surf all the channels marketing to our current fitness obsession for purpose if in doubt). Don't insult our intelligence by insinuating otherwise.  It is immodest, and it is indecent.

How's it going Anchor.... Glad you joined the conversation....

You're wrong about 1 Tim 2:9. Completely wrong. You can't take Paul's use of "modest" and make of it what you want. Paul clear defines what he talking about in the rest of the verse.

"shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array"

Do you get it? Its called context.

Do you see any in the verse that would indicate Paul is talking about how much the garment covers the body?

 

[brianb]

Someone women do spend a lot of money to make their bodies look a certain way like on a tummy tuck to look better than other women. It is certainly wise to take care of our bodies but not obsessively.

You know...sometimes abdominoplasties (tummy tucks) are performed for reasons other than sheer vanity.  But it's kinda hard to castigate an particular "sin" when you have to make exceptions, isn't it? :

I know. That's why added the words "to look better than other women" - those are the key words there. Health reasons is a different matter. Many women however who get a tummy tuck are pretty healthy any ways and are looking for an easy alternative to exercise.

Ahh! But what if they get it for medical reasons AND to look better? Getting a little harder to judge them then, isn't it?

These are just generalizations - I'm not judging any one. Every one has different reasons for getting a tummy tuck or whatever. Usually when someone says they got a tummy tuck they don't say they got it for health reasons. I don't have a problem with someone getting one if exercise won't work for them - this is especially true if they are obese and not just a little overweight. I've never seen any one at the gym who was obese - I have seen some "overweight" people but not obese. It's can be dangerous for someone like that to exercise especially the way I do - they would have to some type of surgery to make it easier to exercise. More people who are not obese now are getting into exercise because they know surgery can't replace that - it's also much cheaper. Medically unnecessary cosmetic surgery is not only expensive but a foolish way to spend money. Btw, when I go to the gym I do it for strength building - I don't focus on achieving a look. I think people should accept themselves the way they are. If they are healthy and not in the modelling or fitness business they should not be trying to look like a super-model or even a fitness model. There are few people who I would even consider to be immodest or obsessed with their looks. Even at the gym they don't look "that" good. The average person doesn't even care too much about their bodies. Most people just want to look healthy and decent - they don't want to try and look better than others because life is too short to worry about those things.

Actually, if an individual is obese, they shouldn't get a tummy tuck. Tummy tucks are for people who only are basically at their goal weight (i.e. already lost their weight) and/or to repair muscles damaged during pregnancy.

And you may think it is a foolish way to spend money but I'm sure others thing that things you enjoy are foolish ways of spending money. To each their own.

I'm actually quite poor and don't spend a lot of money - I always pay off my credit card every month. The reason I answered that other guy's post was because it was about immodesty being connected to wealth. Who are the ones who spend the most money on cosmetic surgery? Rich people. I made the statement that people spend lots of money to make their bodies look better in the same way women in Biblical times adorned themselves excessively with jewelry and outrageous hairstyles - Peter says they did it to win their unbelieving husbands to the Lord but he countered that by saying that a meek and quiet spirit and godly conduct is how they will win their husbands to the Lord not by being more outwardly beautiful. Some women obsess over their looks because they are afraid their husband will leave them for another woman. This happens especially in marriages with unbelievers but also in marriages where one is a believer (new believer) and the husband is not. Most women probably need to wear a little make up and wearing a little bit of jewelry is fine but it's not a big deal. I know someone who has never had her ears pierced - that's totally ok with me  - she's beautiful the way she is. No woman should obsess over their appearance - all that is vain or empty - fearing God is more important. 

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=christundivided]You're wrong about 1 Tim 2:9. Completely wrong. You can't take Paul's use of "modest" and make of it what you want. Paul clear defines what he talking about in the rest of the verse.

"shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array"

Do you get it? Its called context.

Do you see any in the verse that would indicate Paul is talking about how much the garment covers the body?
[/quote]

Be serious now...it's a lot harder to force your preconceived notions onto the text when you look at context.

 

[ALAYMAN]

How's it going Anchor.... Glad you joined the conversation....

You're wrong about 1 Tim 2:9. Completely wrong. You can't take Paul's use of "modest" and make of it what you want. Paul clear defines what he talking about in the rest of the verse.

"shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array"

Do you get it? Its called context.

Do you see any in the verse that would indicate Paul is talking about how much the garment covers the body?

shamefacedness....aidōs.....bashfulness  =  colored underwear in public

Somebody doesn't understand their Bible, and it ain't anchor.

 

[JrChurch]

And, your follow-up statement is absurd.

Absurd?  I just re-read it and it made no sense.  Lol @ me.  What point was I trying to make?

 

[Izdaari]

It depends on her reason for wearing a bikini at the beach. Does she do it just to get people to look at her? To look at the results of her hard work at the gym for her six pack abs?

Probably more the latter. And to get a decent tan.

A decent tan - but not a true all-over tan. You'd have to be nude for that. It probably doesn't matter to you but assuming you're single and you do get married your husband is probably going to see tan lines. There are swimsuits that are actually made for tanning believe it or not the sun goes through the suit - they are not transparent so don't worry about that - they look like regular swimsuits so if your goal is to get an all over tan you may want to invest a swim suit like that. Just google tan through.

I'm divorced and not likely to marry again. It's possible... but unlikely. There are very, very few compatible candidates, and I've gotten used to having things my own way. Good idea about the tan through suits.  :-*

 

[Izdaari]

There's not many women responding to this thread. I've read 2 from women so far - one for and one against bikinis.

Btw, the one who is for bikinis and wears one at the beach I'd be afraid of - she owns a gun. I definitely don't want to visit a beach in the Seattle area - too scary. I wouldn't go to a beach any ways but if did I'd probably not know who she is any ways unless she started talking to me. The only visual clue would be a John 3:16 or some type of distinctively Evangelical Christian tattoo.

LOL! I'll be the tall skinny multiracial one, cafe au lait complexion and a little bit Asian, with great muscle definition and a Girl With the Dragon Tattoo haircut (that's new). I'm probably safer to meet on the beach, no place to conceal my Browning.  :-*

No tattoos yet, but if I do get any they'll be expensive and good art - that's the only kind I want regardless of theme. A Christian tattoo is a good thought, but I haven't yet seen one that does it for me. Easy enough if I find the right one and have the money; Seattle has a lot of really talented tattoo artists.

Btw, I'm not Evangelical anymore. I've defected to Anglicanism. 

 

[brianb]

Oh come on.... You can do it. I asked a simple question... surely you can answer.

Its is abundantly clear that "modest apparel" in 1 Tim 2:9 is about looking "expensive".

Have you ever talked about women wearing "expensive" apparel before? or have you had immodest thoughts toward women wearing "expensive" clothes?

It is a broad statement that addresses attire for the specific purpose of attracting attention to oneself.  That would include attire that is needlessly expensive, gaudy, indecent, or attire completely out of place.  Simply because the example utilized in that particular Scripture emphasizes only one specific application of the term does not change its definition or limit its application.

An Amish woman's attire and the basic bikini clad beach bunny may be equally immodest, just not in the same way.  The Amish woman attires herself to attract the attention of perfect strangers (tourists), and the beach bunny attires herself to attract the attention of perfect strangers (tourists).  The bikini adds lewdness to the equation, however, that the Amish woman's attire likely doesn't.

A bikini, and the accompanying emphasis on a bikini-body,  is about turning heads (surf all the channels marketing to our current fitness obsession for purpose if in doubt). Don't insult our intelligence by insinuating otherwise.  It is immodest, and it is indecent.

How's it going Anchor.... Glad you joined the conversation....

You're wrong about 1 Tim 2:9. Completely wrong. You can't take Paul's use of "modest" and make of it what you want. Paul clear defines what he talking about in the rest of the verse.

"shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array"

Do you get it? Its called context.

Do you see any in the verse that would indicate Paul is talking about how much the garment covers the body?

That has to do with public worship or church. Nothing about beaches. In the Roman Empire they didn't use beaches for showing off. They say woman wore bikini-like garments for athletic purposes and that was in a stadium - never for display or getting a tan on a beach. Maybe the reason the Bible doesn't mention bikinis at the beach or any where in public is because beaches were used for other things. If they wanted to take a bath they used the private bathhouses but that's totally different as they would be nude there. When Jesus said if a man looks at a woman to lust after her he hath committed adultery with her in her heart that was in the days when civilized women in public dressed with much less skin showing even on the beach. It is possible that the people on Melita dressed much differently but the Bible doesn't say but people in civilized cultures didn't think it would be ok to dress that way even on a beach in full view of everyone else on the beach. It's not just on the beach any ways. I've seen people dress like this at other public places as well. I hope it never gets to the point where you can't go any where without seeing so much skin (especially if it is an attractive woman - I could care less if a fat girl like that girl in the photo dresses like that - that does nothing for me and I have a strong stomach). It would actually make going to the beach a more God-glorifying experience - and that should be the goal of all Christians to glorify God in all that they do - no one should go to the beach to get away from God whether they do so consciously or not. This would only apply to single men but if a Christian man can't go to a beach without thinking about a pretty girl there especially if she is a stranger but more importantly if she is not someone who plans to marry you he should either not go or leave right away - the Bible says flee youthful lusts - your mind as well as your body must be pure. It doesn't matter if you never talk to her or do any thing with her. You are primarily obligated to the Lord. You should only go to the beach to be a witness whether you do it in word or in deed. If you sit around and stare at all the pretty girls, you are not being a good witness. She will not respect you if you stare at her and if she finds out you are Christian. She may actually be a very easy girl who wants to use you for sex - if she finds out that you don't want to do that because you are a Christian she will wonder why you stared at her in the first place. Girls like that are not naive - they know why you stare at them especially if she is wearing a bikini. Not all girls wear a bikini to entice a man but every girl who wants to entice a man at the beach will wear a bikini because guys like seeing more skin versus less skin. The more skin is shown the more enticing she is but of course she must be attractive. There's a reason Job said he made a covenant with his eyes; why then should I think upon a maid - it's because maids were young and more attractive, a woman his age would not be considered as enticing enough for him to be unfaithful to his wife. Job was no different from most men today. Most men see younger women at least physically speaking as more attractive. Older women however are sexually attractive more in what they do versus how they appear. Job would probably not have left his wife for a young woman any ways I don't know but he believed it was not right to even think about any woman other than his wife. God doesn't want anything even a thought to come between a man and his wife and/or God.

 

[brianb]

There's not many women responding to this thread. I've read 2 from women so far - one for and one against bikinis.

Btw, the one who is for bikinis and wears one at the beach I'd be afraid of - she owns a gun. I definitely don't want to visit a beach in the Seattle area - too scary. I wouldn't go to a beach any ways but if did I'd probably not know who she is any ways unless she started talking to me. The only visual clue would be a John 3:16 or some type of distinctively Evangelical Christian tattoo.

LOL! I'll be the tall skinny multiracial one, cafe au lait complexion and a little bit Asian, with great muscle definition and a Girl With the Dragon Tattoo haircut (that's new). I'm probably safer to meet on the beach, no place to conceal my Browning.  :-*

No tattoos yet, but if I do get any they'll be expensive and good art - that's the only kind I want regardless of theme. A Christian tattoo is a good thought, but I haven't yet seen one that does it for me. Easy enough if I find the right one and have the money; Seattle has a lot of really talented tattoo artists.

Btw, I'm not Evangelical anymore. I've defected to Anglicanism. 

I  never pictured you like that - that is opposite of what I thought - I thought you were shorter and with longer hair.

By the way there was nothing intentionally flirtatious in my previous post. I'm currently interested in a woman in Ontario right now - she is one of these odd women who are not interested in a relationship right now - but I think she is well worth it. I met her online. I've never met any one else that would change my mind about her - she is very special and she thinks and believes many of the same things I do.

 

[Izdaari]

There's not many women responding to this thread. I've read 2 from women so far - one for and one against bikinis.

Btw, the one who is for bikinis and wears one at the beach I'd be afraid of - she owns a gun. I definitely don't want to visit a beach in the Seattle area - too scary. I wouldn't go to a beach any ways but if did I'd probably not know who she is any ways unless she started talking to me. The only visual clue would be a John 3:16 or some type of distinctively Evangelical Christian tattoo.

LOL! I'll be the tall skinny multiracial one, cafe au lait complexion and a little bit Asian, with great muscle definition and a Girl With the Dragon Tattoo haircut (that's new). I'm probably safer to meet on the beach, no place to conceal my Browning.  :-*

No tattoos yet, but if I do get any they'll be expensive and good art - that's the only kind I want regardless of theme. A Christian tattoo is a good thought, but I haven't yet seen one that does it for me. Easy enough if I find the right one and have the money; Seattle has a lot of really talented tattoo artists.

Btw, I'm not Evangelical anymore. I've defected to Anglicanism. 

I  never pictured you like that - that is opposite of what I thought - I thought you were shorter and with longer hair.

I'm kinda like Michelle Malkin's face on Ann Coulter's body, except with muscles, and with a Joan Jett style. 

Here's a Meez I made a while ago:

It's pretty accurate except I don't actually have a mini-dragon pet, or play bass. And I don't wear that hair style anymore. But learning to play guitar, and maybe bass eventually, is something I have a little ways down my to do list.

By the way there was nothing intentionally flirtatious in my previous post. I'm currently interested in a woman in Ontario right now - she is one of these odd women who are not interested in a relationship right now - but I think she is well worth it. I met her online. I've never met any one else that would change my mind about her - she is very special and she thinks and believes many of the same things I do.

It's all good. I didn't take it as flirtatious.

I hope that other potential relationship works out for you. 

 

[Just John]

Michelle Malkin is hot! 

 

[ALAYMAN]

With all of these dudes inability to be tempted by greater shows of flesh I wonder why Sports Illustrated has Swimsuit Editions rather than a Bib Overall Edition?


Maybe our FFF brethren are just being a bit disingenuous about their philosophical and idealistic virtuousness.




things that make ya go hmmmm....