In article >,
Doug Freyburger > wrote:

> Cheryl wrote:
> > Doug Freyburger wrote:
> >
> >> The popularity of tattoos is a sign or weaking religious hold on
> >> society ...
> >
> > I don't agree.
>
> Note that tattoos are explicitly forbidden by the holy book of the
> majority religion of western civilization. You just disagreed that an
> increasing population of people who flagrantly ignore such a religious
> mandate is a sign of weaking religious hold on society. This strikes me
> as a matter of logic and population counts not as a matter of opinion.

So are shrimp, cutting your beard and polyester-cotton. There's plenty
of all of those around, too.

> > Tats are just ...
>
> The fact that you can view it that way says you do not acknowledge the
> power of the holy book of the majority religion to forbid you from
> having a tattoo.

It doesn't forbid me from having a tattoo, since I'm not a follower of
that religion.

> > a way to express yourself with color and
> > an image. Like jewelry. Or acrylic nails. Or makeup.
>
> Being permanent they are more important than transient decorations, or
> should be viewed as such. Tattoos are definitely a way to express your
> personality through decorations. Because I can take jewelry off I
> think that should give tattoos a larger import. I almost never take off
> my wedding ring but I can do so and it does come off every so often
> even if it's only to confirm that I can still take it off. With a
> tattoo it takes a medical procedure with a recovery healing time to
> remove it.
>
> The reasons for getting a tattoo range from viewing them as lightly as
> jewelry to viewing them as acts of heritage, devotion, personal
> transistion.

Exactly.

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases