People sometimes quote Jesus with lines like, ████████████████████████████████████████████████ and I don’t read that as something to take literally or copy into real life.

To me, it lands more like

I’m not even fully sure what “euphemism” means, but I think it’s

like saying, “You ought to be ashamed of yourself,” if someone is doing a ██████████, ████████████████████, while working as a school teacher in CIS.

Or, “you should go to jail!”

Or a blunt, over-the-top line like, █████████████████████████████████

or even the kind of ugly exaggeration people say when they’re angry, like, ██████████████████████████████████████

I see it as hyperbole, the same way some quotes say,

Because attraction is common, and most people are not literally trying to live by extreme imagery.

In that same spirit, ███████████████████████ treat sexuality through a ██████████.

as and explain it in ways I don’t fully agree with, often tying it to simplistic stories about why someone might feel that way.

People sometimes bring up like as an example, and then try to explain other people’s sexuality through confidence, status, or health.

And people also point to closed environments, like ███████, and argue that confinement can shape behavior when there are limited outlets and limited choices.

On schools and society, I’ve talked with ███████████████████ about mixing boys and girls more thoughtfully at places like ███████████████████████, and I’ve said I’d like that for schools in ███ if I ever had the power to do it.

My aim there is simple: reduce loneliness, reduce pressure, and help teenagers grow up with healthier, normal friendships.

At the same time, I recognize that , , and because that’s who they are.

For me personally, , and I haven’t acted on .

When I write about sexuality, I’m trying to separate fantasy from real life, and I also notice when I slip into — like , , and the aside about██████████ — which I don’t think reads well in public.

So I’m choosing to keep anything explicit out of the public version, and I don’t want to describe or in a general-audience post.

If I’m honest, part of why those ideas show up in drafts is that some people find “hot,” but that doesn’t mean it belongs in a clean, publishable entry.

The safest version of what I’m trying to say is that I can be charming and disarming when I speak, and I’m aware my voice can feel soothing and calming.

I used to compare that vibe to cartoon references, like , but I think it’s clearer to just say: my voice can read softer or more “girly,” not “gay,” and those are different things.

There is a difference, and I don’t want to █████████████████████.

Technically, my voice has a natural pitch or resonance around ███ or so (higher feels bad to me), and I can deepen it down to ███ or ███ if I focus, even though it’s tough.

I once heard people say ██████████ has a similar issue, but I don’t actually know his situation, so ██████████████████████████████

On the religious quote side, it’s also possible that people are repeating what they think Jesus said, not necessarily what he said.

And it’s true that institutions like the ███████████████ shaped what survived, how it was copied, and how it was taught across centuries.

Texts also moved through ███████████, and meaning can shift in that process, which is part of why I try to stay humble about certainty.

In █████████████████, Jesus is described as ██████████████████████████, with ████ being fully human.

So the story presents him as divine in origin but living a real human life in human flesh.

███████ often find that confusing, because they accept the ████████████ but don’t accept ████████████ language.

When people argue about the virgin birth, they sometimes bring up and , but I don’t think graphic anatomical discussion is necessary or respectful here.

What I mean more simply is: the tradition claims ██████████████████████████████████████████████, and that claim became central to belief and debate.

Sometimes my writing also slips into dramatic, cliffhanger language — like saying ████████████████████████████████ tied to █████ — and I can see how that reads as sensational rather than calm.

And when I reference events like ████████████ at a golf club, and I mention details like █████████████████████, I’m reacting to how dangerous things can be, not trying to state verified security facts.

From a faith perspective, ███████ reason that a baby requires a father, so they interpret the origin as █████████, or an ███████████████████, rather than human parentage.

Some of the confusion also comes from the variations among ████████████████ ████████ encountered, and the way different communities explained Jesus’s nature in different terms.

When I compare it to , I’m trying to communicate “demigod” language, but I understand that’s a myth analogy, not a strict theological proof.

The core point I’m reaching for is: if Jesus lived in the physical world, he would have had real human limits, including suffering and death, in the story as told.

Circling back to sexuality: I’m choosing to remove , including and , because that’s not appropriate for a general 14+ audience.

And I’m also removing any ; curiosity about the body or intimacy can be expressed without explicit details.

I know some girls might misread my personality — like me preferring cooking and being closer in vibe to ██████ than ██████ — and then █████████████████ for being platonic.

But my view is simple: I judge friendship quality based on mutual interests like cooking or baking cake, and I can have respectful, platonic ties with people without turning everything into sex — so that’s the tone I want to keep here.

காலிஃபோர்னியா, USA காலிஃபோர்னியா, USA இல் எழுதப்பட்டது, வெளியிடப்பட்டது, வடிவமைக்கப்பட்டது