![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png)
Originally Posted by
little red riding hood
there are obvious sins. these are the ones that infringe on people's freedom. but is it okay to call something a sin if it's only hurting somebody else's feelings? i mean, you can't live a life without hurting someone else's feelings. i don't think one would be sinning if they had sexual relations with someone other than their mate. it would hurt that person but the only breach here would be their word. nothing more. then again, if you're married and you commit adultery, than yes, that's a sin because you have a broken your promise to God or to state law or whatever.
but, if most sins are decided by an unwritten rule decided by a majority, then i don't think you can call those sins. if they don't infringe on another's freedom, it can't be a sin. it can be morally questionable, but that's about it. we are human beings not idealistic angels. even the God of the Old Testament sins. in fact, He seems to be above sinning, above the Law. He encourages Jacob to lie and rewards him. He "tests" Job the same way an entomologist would do to an ant. He slays the populations of Sodom and Gomorrah for their iniquity.
so, i ask you why can't a guy have two "sinning" girls at once?