Poll: Is it sinful for a Catholic to get a tattoo?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
8
0%
0 0%
19
0%
0 0%
51
0%
0 0%
Total 0 vote(s) 0%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Tattoos
#31
(09-01-2010, 08:53 PM)JesusFreak84 Wrote: It's more that people will just trust what the tattoo artist SAYS this or that kanji means, not check it for themselves, and then be amazed when someone who can actually read that language tells them what it really means rather than what they thought it means.  (Such as this comic :P http://tinyurl.com/2vexco3 )

Just today, I noticed a tattoo on a man at work (he has several on his arms, but his skin is dark and so are the tattoos, so they don't stand out) when I was talking to him while he was in a car (I was outside). I noticed his arm had Chinese characters on it. I'm learning Chinese. I told him what part of it said (one "word" (two characters)). I was unable to see the first character (if any...I hope, because the one above this word was a particle). I have a feeling his tattoo doesn't mean what he think it means.

Reply
#32
(09-01-2010, 09:02 PM)Credo Wrote:
kimbaichan Wrote:I've never seen a tattoo in Latin, what kinds of words or phrases do they usually get?

Such works usually express virile sentiments. (This is a hidden compliment to the allure of Latin even in this day and age.) For example, there was a guy I worked with a few years ago who believed he had a tattoo of Truth. I forget what word it was now, but it definitely wasn't Truth. Most recently, and most puzzling, another fellow I know inscribed, "Or peace, or war" into himself. I think the last chap was going for something along the lines of, "Chose peace or war." Live and learn.

The last one is slightly less puzzling than the translation implies, as the conjunction aut (or) is frequently used in the construction "aut x aut y" for "either x or y," similar to how "et x et y" means "both x and y."
Reply
#33
(09-01-2010, 08:37 PM)Gilgamesh Wrote: I once met an Evangelical who had "WWJD" tattooed on his wrist.  I guess he figured ol’ Jesus would’ve gotten a tattoo.

:laughing:

That's hilarious. 
Reply
#34
(09-01-2010, 06:39 PM)JesusFreak84 Wrote:
(09-01-2010, 11:29 AM)Credo Wrote:
cunctas_haereses Wrote:Also many are placed on areas of the skin that should remain unseen and are thus immodest.

Boo for tattoos, but may I ask why there are areas of skin which should remain unseen?

Ever hear of the "tramp stamp" tattoo?  The idea is that, for where that tattoo's located, the only way it's visible to others is if the woman's dressed, frankly, like a tramp.  If a woman's got a tattoo ON HER BREAST, how's that not immodest?  No one should be seeing it, yet what point is there to a tattoo besides to be seen?


What's disordered is you going around pulling girls shirts to the side to see if the have a tattoo on their breasts....what's up with that?

This discussion is already off couse for reason posted previously in modesty threads, and more reasons not listed that have primarily to do with tattoos....but I gotta go pick up UD and drop a little at ballet....prude on boys....prude on.
Reply
#35
I thought the tramp stamp was the tattoo at the lower back that is visible from behind whenever the woman lifts her arms to elbow level or leans forward at least a little.

Or worse...  sits down.
Reply
#36
(09-02-2010, 04:10 PM)Scipio_a Wrote: ....prude on boys....prude on.

I'm not sure I understand, Scipio. Why is everyone who is more conservative on these issues than you a prude?

I mean, what if these prudish individuals are objectively right but we won't all know until we die? Wouldn't they then be doing the right thing in telling others that they should not have tattoos? Will they be prudes then?

I, for one, don't haven't formed an opinion on the moral issue.
Reply
#37
I have a tattoo and was not drunk, even though I was in college and on spring break!

I don't know whether it's a sin or not. It's different from ear-piercing because it's permanent, but I don't know how much that matters theologically. In any case, I probably wouldn't do it again because I'm no longer comfortable with the idea.
Reply
#38
(09-01-2010, 08:53 PM)Cyriacus Wrote: I have been told by my dentist, an older Chaldean Catholic gentleman, that it was quite common even thirty-odd years ago for Chaldeans in Iraq to wear tattoos of the cross on the underside of the wrist. My memory's a bit foggy, but I believe he said that certain situations required him to conceal his with shirt cuffs.

Dang.  I'm trying to figure out why I haven't done this yet.  I've been jonesing to get a crucifix with the words "Ecce Agnus Dei" underneath in Roman lettering on my wrist.  Either that or the chi-rho with the alpha and omega.

How sweet would this look on the inside of the wrist?  I'm thinking pretty sweet.

[Image: chirho.gif]
Reply
#39
It used to be that only a couple of sorts of folks typically got tattoos in the 60s 70s and then 80s.

These were Rdnecks and sailors.  Sailors typically got a tattoo with an anchor or the navy seal or something, rdneck got one that said the equivalent of "Bad Boyz" or maybe an American or confederate flag.

There is a very cogent argument against folks typically getting Tattoos that was put in print by either an FSSP priest or SSPX, I cannot recall which, and it contains valid reasons against tattoos under the typical examples described above.  You all are familiar with them, they include at least one touch upon here, the body is a temple and not to be defaced....etc....etc....etc.


But something changed in America in the 90s that puts some of that argument on hold.  See, we adorn our bodies with every sort of thing across the globe, many of these things are acceptable to the Church.  Tattoos would be one of these things.  While they were not acceptable to the culture at large, it was unseemly for someone to get one other than a sailor or a rdneck.  Some folks consider these class of people unseemly to begin with, so they have no real problem with them getting tats.

In the 90s there was a cultural shift.  I have not looked into the reason, nor do I care what it was.  Perhaps it was the rejection of cigarettes and the latching onto something else...in this case tattoos....really, like I said, I don't know and I don't care.

But tattoos are so prevalent at this point that it is not unseemly for the general population to get one, and since not all tattoos can be labeled as defacing a temple...some are adornment...such as the one the freak boys want to label "tramp stamp" .   Some of these are particularly attractive, and although, from an emotional stand point I was wholesale against them, it was only because as a child I associated tats with sailors and rdnecks.  Now they can be associated with anyone.


All that said, there are times when getting a tattoo or tattoos would be sinful, and times when it would not be.  It is not for anyone on this board to decide other than the person getting it...And just because you can't get a girl with a sweet tattoo on the small of her back, it does not make her a bad person.
Reply
#40
(09-02-2010, 06:56 PM)Walty Wrote:
(09-01-2010, 08:53 PM)Cyriacus Wrote: I have been told by my dentist, an older Chaldean Catholic gentleman, that it was quite common even thirty-odd years ago for Chaldeans in Iraq to wear tattoos of the cross on the underside of the wrist. My memory's a bit foggy, but I believe he said that certain situations required him to conceal his with shirt cuffs.

Dang.  I'm trying to figure out why I haven't done this yet.  I've been jonesing to get a crucifix with the words "Ecce Agnus Dei" underneath in Roman lettering on my wrist. 

So that people who look at you would think you're the Lamb of God?

How self-absorbed . . .  ;)
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)