Post by: gcskate27 on July 16, 2004, 10:32:00 AM
Post by: beaumac on July 16, 2004, 11:00:00 AM
As for your opinion on gay marriage, who are you to tell someone else how to run their life? You are allowed to have your own opinion, just know that its bigotry
Post by: BenJeremy on July 16, 2004, 11:14:00 AM
1) Who proposes teaching children anything about sodomy? What does that have to do with reproductive education? It has nothing to do with gay marriage, anyway.
2) As for people not getting married, that's a trend that's been happening for decades, worldwide. You could just as easily blame porn or TV. Marriage is down int he US, too, but we don't have gay marriage yet, so how do you reconcile that?
3) No church will lose their "tax exemption" over such a thing. Churches are not forced to give services to anybody by the government.
4) Rome??? WTF????
5) I'm curious, how do two gay people, who are married, get AIDS? Assuming they are faithful (the reason they got married in the first place), how would they get infected in the first place?
Also, what does the argument have to do with two women who are married?
6) Gays are already allowed to adopt. Gay marriage won't change that. Moot point already.
7) You are allowed to have an opinion. If our anti-Zionists here feel Jews should all be gassed, whould we pass a law? This is why we live in a democracy, so the MAJORITY can rule on such things, not narrow-minded people.
Post by: Ranger72 on July 16, 2004, 11:28:00 AM
However people did not fight and die to defend a country that is not free. We can not be a free country and yet tell people how to live there lives.
I may not agree with a gay lifestyle. But I definitely dont agree that our government should have a right to tell someone they cant do what makes them happy.
Post by: thomes08 on July 16, 2004, 03:18:00 PM
BenJ: i think your post was really good. Said a lot of stuff for me so i wouldn't have to.
Ranger: While i disagree with you on the gay marriage issue, i commend you for at least having a brain about the situation as opposed to just going on what your religion/parents/peers tell you. I assume you get your beliefs from somewhere but you had a really open, logical mind in your argument and that's really commendable.
Yeah, the fall of Rome was because of gay people.
But don't bother trying to prove anything to dark link, if you've read the "face it, bush failed" thread on here you'll know he's NEVER lost an argument.
thomes08
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 16, 2004, 03:21:00 PM
| QUOTE (Ranger72) |
| Marriage should be between a man and a woman. Thats just the way it is. However people did not fight and die to defend a country that is not free. We can not be a free country and yet tell people how to live there lives. I may not agree with a gay lifestyle. But I definitely dont agree that our government should have a right to tell someone they cant do what makes them happy. |
couldn't have said it better myself
| QUOTE (BenJeremy) |
| 6) Gays are already allowed to adopt. Gay marriage won't change that. Moot point already. |
Where? And becuase it is legal does not change the fact it is wrong. Two men cannot teach a girl how to be a woman and vice-versa. 'Nuff said
Post by: Mr. Chips on July 16, 2004, 03:37:00 PM
I don't like Bush or Kerry. Bush spent 120 billion on Ira and counting. I think people already criticized him enough, simply becuase he is a man with morals and politicians don't seem to be capable of that. Kerry on the other hand is about the biggest hypocrite you could ever dream up. But the fact is that's how much people are fed up with Dubya. Honestly, Gary Coleman is the only real candidate for President.
Post by: nemt on July 16, 2004, 03:53:00 PM
1. The US has three main issues, in this order: Economic strength, domestic security, and morality (or lack thereof)
2. The democrats adopt unpopular views of all three (insane taxation, defense cuts, aborted child organ harvesting)
3. Thus, the democrats try to broaden the issue-scope of the country, by telling its constituency it should care about whatever braindead ideal they want on the platform that week.
Post by: Dark_Link2135 on July 16, 2004, 04:05:00 PM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Jul 17 2004, 12:53 AM) |
| Here's the democrat party (and hence, it's liberal flavor of the month, johnny boy) in relation to american politics in a nutshell: 1. The US has three main issues, in this order: Economic strength, domestic security, and morality (or lack thereof) 2. The democrats adopt unpopular views of all three (insane taxation, defense cuts, aborted child organ harvesting) 3. Thus, the democrats try to broaden the issue-scope of the country, by telling its constituency it should care about whatever braindead ideal they want on the platform that week. |
couldn't have said it better myself.
and several liberal magazines have had headlines saying something to the extent of "dont like kerry's views? just wait a week."
Post by: nemt on July 16, 2004, 04:10:00 PM
Post by: CaTcHa on July 16, 2004, 04:42:00 PM
kids like you dont help the divorce rate
| QUOTE |
| couldn't have said it better myself. |
Point here is you couldnt have said it yourself
At 17 you have yet to learn that the real world is very very much different than posting on the internet , try knocking a few doors with your views if you want some real debate/responce (sic)
Post by: nemt on July 16, 2004, 04:45:00 PM
| QUOTE (CaTcHa @ Jul 16 2004, 09:42 PM) |
| At 17 you have yet to learn that the real world is very very much different than posting on the internet , try knocking a few doors with your views if you want some real debate/responce (sic) |
..so I assume you're older than 17, and yet, you never learned how to spell a common, eight letter word - but still have enough experience to know all about "the real world?" Very interesting.
Post by: nemt on July 16, 2004, 04:48:00 PM
| QUOTE (ahhh @ Jul 16 2004, 09:47 PM) |
| I still don't understand why people mispelling words on the internet destroys their credibilty. |
If you're not educated enough to understand basic grammar concepts, how can you be educated enough to understand politics?
Post by: ahhh on July 16, 2004, 04:53:00 PM
Post by: nemt on July 16, 2004, 04:53:00 PM
| QUOTE (ahhh @ Jul 16 2004, 09:53 PM) |
| Dude its the internet. People can be complete math geniuses and not be able to spell just like someone can grasp politics but spell wrong on the internet. It doesn't matter if you forget grammer after being out of school for awhile. |
..but most of the time the poster hasn't been out of school for a while, it's usually some fifteen year old who gets his political news from weekend update. It has nothing to do with different skills, either, it just shows an overall lack of education, and intelligence, as do liberal opinions.
Post by: CaTcHa on July 16, 2004, 05:06:00 PM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Jul 17 2004, 01:53 AM) |
| ..but most of the time the poster hasn't been out of school for a while, it's usually some fifteen year old who gets his political news from weekend update. It has nothing to do with different skills, either, it just shows an overall lack of education, and intelligence, as do liberal opinions. |
At our council meetings here in the UK we deem it rude not to handwrite the meeting minutes and to shorten "has not" to "has`nt" would indeed be frowned upon ,but I would not point that out to you here.
I dont agree with lambasting any one for english punctuation etc I but am careful at those meetings because they are important and I can claim expences.
By the same measure I still allow a member of our congregation who has MS her point of view even though she may soon be unable to use either a pen or a keyboard , thats an extreme example but do you see why your non acceptance of typos is so VERY VERY shallow and damn right rude?
This is no more than an extended Games Cosole forum and has no bearing on real life changes punctuation is hardly a necessatitity (sic) , there it is again luk (sic) ohh and again.
oops its ull (sic) oover (sic) the place
Maybe a wordadlicalyinterfalagulous sort of person would be bothered (thats from my own dictionary so see if you can find that one in your spellchecker)
you obviously missed this bit from my las post or you dont know the meaning of "(sic)" it was entered to wind you up...
"Ha Ha Ha Nemt but you will have seen surely that I had already seen your post in this thread so had anticipated it did you not notice my tell tale (sic) ,
from our last trade in another thread .."
Is your idea of freespeech only if it can be either pronounced or spelt right
There is not a wank*r icon for me to use but I do hope that , should you keep this viewpoint , you do at some time in your life loose an ability to function 100% and your rights are then deminished as a result you would deserve no better
Post by: gcskate27 on July 16, 2004, 05:35:00 PM
and before i get attacked for "attacking" the original poster, i wasnt attacking him at all... calling someone ignorant is not attacking them, childish maybe, but ignorant is surely not...
and the childish comment came at your 7th reason btw, and was well warranted imo...
thankfully some people with sense have come into this thread and have already said what needs to be said...
Post by: Dark_Link2135 on July 16, 2004, 06:24:00 PM
onward to Ace's rebuttul. finally back on topic. well, i guess not, this was about kerry, but this debate is much more interesting. btw - good rebuttal. finally, i get someone with intelligence in their comments who doesn't use only flaming to back their arguements.
"Yes, being intolerant to having an open mind to certain issues can be bad, as in your opinion about gays. People can be intolerant of a lot of things and be ok, like you mentioned, crime, and basically anything else that would be considered harmful towards another person or community. But being intolerant to the issue of "gays" is not a good thing. Your perfectly entitled to your opinion, but to be completely closeminded to other opinions on it will never teach you anything but hatred towards another group of people."
obviously in your opinion it is bad to be intolerant of faggots. and i am not completely closeminded. i have had plenty of time to form my own opinions, and this is the one i have. and who said i hate gays? you are using far to much guess work. maybe i do, maybe i dont. i suppose i hate the fact that they are faggots, but i dont hate the person, id like to see them recover. but i do hate them as long as they are faggots. okay, that was sort of contradictory....i hate the faggot, but i see the potential to recover. something like that. but, then again, i suppose your opinion is always right, so being intolerant of faggots is a bad thing. ah well.
Show me one place in history where repressing one person simply because of a race/geographical/religious/sexual characteristic has ever been good for humanity? More often than not repression of anyone leads to wars and eventually the end of the reason they were being repressed. Let me ask you your opinion on some more recent events in history where repression has reversed. What is your opinion on Women having EO with everything? Just over a century ago they had no rights, now look, do you consider that a bad thing? Then of course the repression and civil rights movement of the blacks.. Do you feel that wasn't possitive for mankind?"
race and sexuality are two different subjects. lets keep them separate.
"Show me one place in history where repressing one person simply because of a race/geographical/religious/sexual characteristic has ever been good for humanity?"
who said anything about one person? show me one place in history where NOT repressing someone for their sexual preferences has benefited humanity. raised taxes, lowers morality.
"Just a quick note on your comminism comment. Have you ever actually read how a communist government is supposed to work? Or have you gone just by world events to form your opinion. Comminism as a government if run and followed as is written is actually a pretty good system, the problem is, it doesnt seem to be one for humanity. Human nature just cant deal with it, but in nature, you will find many examples of simplified communism within many species and it works great.
"
this will be fun. true communism is impossible. in a true communist government, everybody is equal, if you needed a car, you would just pick one up off the street and take it. everything would belong to everyone. but pretty soon, someone with the biggest gun takes over, and its actually a dictatorship, but still known as communism. its just like anarchy is impossible. may be good, if it was possible for it to work. show me these examples of "animal communism" and ill consider your point to be somewhat legit. and how they work great. and how all that would apply to faggots.
"Rome... I always thought the fall of Rome was due to using lead in their aquaducts witch caused wide spread lead poisining. That caused all sorts of mental issues as well and physical and reproductive.... or maybe that was a different history I read about."
rome collapsed economically in on itself. there are many theories as to what caused their economy to collapse. in most, morality plays a small role.
"Lastly.. I draw the limit as staying within the species... there are many examples in nature of a certain percentage of seemingly "gay" examples within that species. It is part of nature, one that didn't just appear, and one that isnt going to go away. It is one that all people will have to accept and move on. Why would you think the next logical step from accepting gays as equals is to allowing beastiality? That's just sick dude."
thats the next logical step because we have sick people on this planet. faggots and....people who practice beastiality (not sure what they are called in one word). once faggots get their rights, the "beasts"????? will want theirs.
actually, there are not any examples of gays in animal communities. some guy in an issue of readers digest about a year ago did a study on this, there was only one kind of small rodent or something like that that exhibited any behavior of homosexuality. its kind of fuzzy in my memory, but thats what it was. if i get the time, ill try to find the article. yeah, i know that sounds kind of cheap, and i apoligize, so bear with me.
if you do find any links proving there are faggots in the animal world, please, show me.
well, at least i can intelligently debate with someone here. id tell you the old forums i used to go to, where people did nothing but flame and really did not debate, but, well, i have some rather...embarrassing posts which would damamge my credibility.
they dont reflect me at all now, but im afraid that some of you would be all too happy to use these against me. ah well. when i went there, i wasnt to good at debate, lol. towards the end, i actually won a couple of the arguements. the rest just died out. thats what i meant when i said i never lost and arguement. of course, ive only been in 15 or so forum debates. so thats not saying much. but i didn't lie.nemt - i hate to do this since you are the only person on my side, but they are right. forums are not a place to worry about grammer. i dont want to go over my posts and make sure every single thing i have typed makes me sound like i have an english major.
catcha - "At 17 you have yet to learn that the real world is very very much different than posting on the internet , try knocking a few doors with your views if you want some real debate/responce (sic) "
and what is THIS supposed to mean? and just how old are you? and be truthful, as i have. i think i can get a general idea from the way you type and act on these forums. id say mid twenties.
Post by: Dark_Link2135 on July 16, 2004, 06:49:00 PM
anyway, so animals are faggots. well, some of them. but animals are radically different then humans. gay sex serves no purpose in the animal world. animals exist to reproduce, then die and be food for something else. thats pretty much their life. so, then, why does this have anything to do with people? there is no purpose for it in people either other then sick pleasure.
thats my take on the matter.
Post by: The unProfessional on July 16, 2004, 06:50:00 PM
Post by: BenJeremy on July 16, 2004, 07:34:00 PM
| QUOTE (The unProfessional @ Jul 16 2004, 10:50 PM) |
| Your post says "faggot" nine times. That makes it really hard to take it seriously. |
Agreed.... kind of like speaking out against special benefits for African-Americans and using the N-word to refer to them. It speaks VOLUMES about your state of mind.
Dark_Link2135:
A good friend of my wife's is a lesbian who has been married in a state where it is legal. She is raising a son and they are doing a damn good job. Of course, through them, I've met all sorts of people - most very nice, decent people, and you'd be hard pressed to use the term "Faggot" around them (who knows? you may work beside many "faggots" and not even know it). What they do amongst themselves is really their own business, if it doesn't harm anybody else, and to be honest, from what I know about them, they don't have much of a choice in the matter (regardless of what you've undoubtably been fed about "recruitment" or "learned behavior").
Now, I'll admit there are people who are homosexual and "deviant" - but there are plenty more heterosexuals who are "deviant" too... but my term refers to behavior that intrudes on others (rape, molestation, child abuse). Again, the test here is whether or not such behavior involves others, outside of their own volition or with coercion. Anything else is a matter of privacy (since, as a matter of the test, I am not forced to witness other's sexual acts, either).
Now it seems to me, as much revulsion as you have, you either have been forced to participate in such activities or have apparently seen gay porn. If that's the case, then I hope you can get the counselling/therapy you need to recover and those responsible are brought to justice. The other possibility, well, I've lived a long enough life to see that happen as well (revulsion towards something a person wants to repress in themselves) - there's another case for therapy.
In any case, you seem to be a very angry, resentful person who wishes to intrude on the lives of others and enforce your own strange and puritanical sexual views on others in the guise of "protecting the world from AIDS". This might be the biggest tragedy here; that whatever intelligence you have is hopelessly bottled up behind bigotry and bias.
Post by: Dark_Link2135 on July 16, 2004, 07:54:00 PM
solution for gays - leave them as they were in the 70's. sodomy is illegal, and there are no marriage rights. thats how it should be imo.
have to type this fast, we are in the middle of the thunderstorm
more to come later
Post by: gcskate27 on July 16, 2004, 08:01:00 PM
Post by: Master-Chief on July 16, 2004, 08:48:00 PM
Also, not to sound too religious in this political thread, but in Islam (the religion I follow), gay marriages are forbidden. I am sure this is the same in other religions, but I cannot speak for others. Now to come to think of it, Islam is indirectly hated by the U.S, so I don't think the President will give a damn.
Post by: nemt on July 16, 2004, 08:57:00 PM
| QUOTE (Master-Chief @ Jul 17 2004, 01:48 AM) |
| Also, not to sound too religious in this political thread, but in Islam (the religion I follow), gay marriages are forbidden. I am sure this is the same in other religions, but I cannot speak for others. Now to come to think of it, Islam is indirectly hated by the U.S, so I don't think the President will give a damn. |
Yeah, nevermind the whole saving millions of muslims thing...
Post by: gcskate27 on July 16, 2004, 09:09:00 PM
| QUOTE (Master-Chief @ Jul 16 2004, 09:48 PM) |
| I mean to come to think of that the first living mankind were Adam and Eve (a male and a female). |
got any proof of that? didnt think so...
| QUOTE |
| There will be too many things to change if gay marriages are allowed. |
youre right... its too much trouble to give someone rights... imagine all the paperwork!
Post by: nemt on July 16, 2004, 09:49:00 PM
| QUOTE (gcskate27 @ Jul 17 2004, 02:09 AM) |
| youre right... its too much trouble to give someone rights... imagine all the paperwork! |
Gays already have the same rights straights do, and no one has the right to change what marriage means.
Post by: gcskate27 on July 16, 2004, 09:57:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| mar·riage Pronunciation: 'mer-ij, 'ma-rij Function: noun Etymology: Middle English mariage, from Anglo-French, from marier to marry 1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage> b : the mutual relation of married persons : WEDLOCK c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage 2 : an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities 3 : an intimate or close union <the marriage of painting and poetry -- J. T. Shawcross> |
i guess youre right... you cant change definitions...
face it, its fucking arbitrary and you dont have a good reason against it...
Post by: Colonel32 on July 17, 2004, 12:32:00 AM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Jul 17 2004, 06:49 AM) |
| Gays already have the same rights straights do |
Gay couples do not have the same rights as married couples. No one is talking about individual rights but you Nemt.
| QUOTE |
| and no one has the right to change what marriage means. |
No one would be changing what marriage means to you, if it wasn't in the news you wouldn't even know it was happening.
Marriage should not be defined by the government, but rather the people involved in the marriage. I'm surprised so many self proclaimed conservatives don't follow this logic.
Post by: thomes08 on July 17, 2004, 01:44:00 AM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Jul 17 2004, 01:48 AM) |
| If you're not educated enough to understand basic grammar concepts, how can you be educated enough to understand politics? |
well nemt you finally atmitted it.... Bush CANNOT run the country
thomes08
edit: please reply to this i'm looking forward to whatever smart ass comment you're going to make to try and get out of this one
Post by: gcskate27 on July 17, 2004, 02:04:00 AM
Post by: melon on July 17, 2004, 03:18:00 AM
Your logic is unfallable. Nemt will either not post in this again (ive just reduced the chances of that), will ignore you post, will attack liberal hippies or attack someoens sspelin.
Post by: nemt on July 17, 2004, 08:05:00 AM
| QUOTE (melon @ Jul 17 2004, 08:18 AM) |
| Your logic is unfallable. Nemt will either not post in this again (ive just reduced the chances of that), will ignore you post, will attack liberal hippies or attack someoens sspelin. |
Actually, I just see if anyone replied to/quoted me on whatever page the post is up to. It's not any more complicated than that.
Anyway, Bush has a baccalaureate from Yale, and an MBA from Harvard (the first president to have an MBA). Additionally, he was smart enough to fly an F102.
Questioning president bush's intelligence is a clear sign of straw grasping.
Post by: melon on July 17, 2004, 09:28:00 AM
Face ti netm bushes inteijence is sumwot laking.
Its a standard joke the world over, his brains consist of spaggheti hoops and candyfloss.
He is without doubt the stupidest world leader at this time.
Post by: 67thRaptorBull on July 17, 2004, 11:27:00 AM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Jul 17 2004, 11:05 AM) |
| Actually, I just see if anyone replied to/quoted me on whatever page the post is up to. It's not any more complicated than that. Anyway, Bush has a baccalaureate from Yale, and an MBA from Harvard (the first president to have an MBA). Additionally, he was smart enough to fly an F102. Questioning president bush's intelligence is a clear sign of straw grasping. |
its called money
hes an idiot, he cant even talk in correct english, and i qoute a few
from jay leno in 2000 during the election
(puts on an al gore face mask) "this is more scarier"
- george fucking bush
"we were awares of the situation at hand"
-george fucking bush
"the arbugrafif.........(long 7 second pause knowing he fucked up)............................. situation.......
-george fucking bush
Post by: thomes08 on July 17, 2004, 07:24:00 PM
"A RESULTS-ORIENTED ADMINISTRATION WILL MAKE AMERICA WHAT WE WANT IT TO BE-A LITERATE COUNTRY AND A HOPEFULLER COUNTRY."-WASHINGTON, D.C., JAN. 11, 2001
"NATURAL GAS IS HEMISPHERIC. I LIKE TO CALL IT HEMISPHERIC IN NATURE BECAUSE IT IS A PRODUCT THAT WE CAN FIND IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS."
AUSTIN, TEXAS, DEC. 20, 2000
"THEY MISUNDERESTIMATED ME."
BENTONVILLE, ARK., NOV. 6, 2000
"THEY WANT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTROLLING SOCIAL SECURITY LIKE IT'S SOME KIND OF FEDERAL PROGRAM."
ST. CHARLES, MO., NOV. 2, 2000
"STATES SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO ENACT REASONABLE LAWS AND RESTRICTIONS PARTICULARLY TO END THE INHUMANE PRACTICE OF ENDING A LIFE THAT OTHERWISE COULD LIVE."
-CLEVELAND, JUNE 29, 2000
"ACTUALLY, I...THIS MAY SOUND A LITTLE WEST TEXAN TO YOU, BUT I LIKE IT. WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT...WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT MYSELF, AND WHEN HE'S TALKING ABOUT MYSELF, ALL OF US ARE TALKING ABOUT ME."
--HARDBALL, MSNBC, MAY 31, 2000
"THE FACT THAT HE RELIES ON FACTS...SAYS THINGS THAT ARE NOT FACTUAL...ARE GOING TO UNDERMINE HIS CAMPAIGN."
-NEW YORK TIMES, MARCH 4, 2000
"IT'S CLEARLY A BUDGET. IT'S GOT A LOT OF NUMBERS IN IT."
-REUTERS, MAY 5, 2000
GOV. BUSH: " I TALKED TO MY LITTLE BROTHER, JEB...I HAVEN'T TOLD THIS TO MANY PEOPLE. BUT HE'S THE GOVERNOR OF...I SHOULDN'T CALL HIM MY LITTLE BROTHER...MY BROTHER, JEB, THE GREAT GOVERNOR OF TEXAS." JIM LEHRER: "FLORIDA." GOV. BUSH: "FLORIDA. THE STATE OF THE FLORIDA."
-THE NEWSHOUR WITH JIM LEHRER, APRIL 27, 2000
"I UNDERSTAND SMALL BUSINESS GROWTH. I WAS ONE."
-NEW YORK DAILY NEWS, FEB. 19, 2000
"I KNOW HOW HARD IT IS FOR YOU TO PUT FOOD ON YOUR FAMILY."
-GREATER NASHUA, N.H., CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, JAN. 27, 2000
ok i got sick of posting this i didn't even get through 2000 but you have a taste. This isn't for personal attack on anyone here just thought i'd give people a laugh.
PS if you LOOOOOVE bush you can still find humor in his speeches
thomes08
Post by: thomes08 on July 17, 2004, 08:11:00 PM
thomes08
Post by: thomes08 on July 17, 2004, 08:44:00 PM
thomes08
People need to get over the religous aspect of marriage. yeah that sounds weird but think about it. A LOT of people that get married do not practice any religion and they just do it cause it's the thing to do. It is a commitment, that's all it is nowadays. I'm going to get married and my religious beliefs are... well lets just say i'm more scientific than gullable. Religion has nothing to do if i get married. I'll get married for love and commitment. Why deny that to anyone?
Post by: thomes08 on July 17, 2004, 10:17:00 PM
Anyways it's pissing me off that our gov't and fucking citizens of this country segregating people like this. It's similar to slavery IMO.
FUCK! this pisses me off
thomes08
Post by: thomes08 on July 17, 2004, 10:32:00 PM
thomes08
Post by: gcskate27 on July 18, 2004, 03:07:00 AM
it was pretty much a given with the person we chose to give the ceremony... and i have no problem with gay marraige... nor gay people in general... anyone who does have a problem with gay people by default is a bigot, and, in my estiamtion, a moron...
and to address the marijuana is harmful commercials, they are just banking on peoples lack of common sense, which unfortunatly works...
Post by: melon on July 18, 2004, 04:55:00 AM
Its becoming more relaxed in the UK. You dont get arrested for smoking a bit of ganj anymore.
Post by: alwaysonjohn on July 18, 2004, 09:29:00 AM
| QUOTE (BenJeremy @ Jul 16 2004, 07:14 PM) |
| On gay marriages: 3) No church will lose their "tax exemption" over such a thing. Churches are not forced to give services to anybody by the government. |
Actually if any non-profit organization "discrimates" in any way set unreasonable by the government they will lose their tax-exemption status.
for more information request an issue of www.thenewamerican.com for a daily reading of true conservatism along with joining the john birch society.
Post by: Heet on July 18, 2004, 09:55:00 AM
Post by: thomes08 on July 18, 2004, 10:13:00 AM
thomes08
Post by: melon on July 18, 2004, 01:20:00 PM
Post by: The unProfessional on July 18, 2004, 02:40:00 PM
Post by: melon on July 18, 2004, 03:53:00 PM
The police dont really care.
And about the green, ive just booked 4 days in Amsterdam over Christmas! I cant wait!!!!!!
Just me and my girl....
Actually cant wait to go to the Van Gough and Rembrant museums.
Post by: The unProfessional on July 19, 2004, 01:12:00 AM
Post by: The unProfessional on July 19, 2004, 01:35:00 AM
The heroin question is an interesting one. It's one of those arguments where there are fantastic points on both sides. It's tough to predict, without actual experimentation, what would become of such actions. With drugs like heroin, users can't quit cold turkey. The withdrawals are simply too intense. So some sort of controlled rehab where they're actually given decreasing doses while undergoing some sort of counseling, I think, would work pretty well. Addicts of chemically enhanced drugs, like heroin and cocaine, don't take their fix lightly, and the fewer addicts we have, the fewer related deaths and crimes we would see. Cops are under a constant barrage of crime as a result of heavy drugs, so I can see why they'd support a fairly liberal legislation on drugs, solely because I imagine the violent crime rate related to drugs is proportional to the # of addicts.
I doubt we'll see a serious debate like that here in the US anytime soon. People are too busy putting the burden of self responsibility on the government and law enforcement. People blame the gov't for controlling our liberties, when it's us who creating these strict controls. Regardless of the issue, there are tons of loud obnoxious voices telling the "authorities" they fucked up somewhere, instead of looking into their own households. That conflict is occuring everywhere... schools are a major arena for that.
Post by: melon on July 19, 2004, 03:41:00 AM
The heroin idea has been talked about quite a bit over here as well. Im sure it was tried in holland but i dont know how succesful it was.
There was a funny story in the papers about a year ago. The government was growing crops of ganja for medical experiments, but they grew it beside a major motorway with only a 2ft fence at its border. There was loads of photos in the papers with cars stopping alongside the field and filling there cars completely full of the crop, people had even gone and hired vans and where filling them up. It was quite embarrising for the authorities but it gave the country a laugh.
If we legalised most drugs, including pot andcocaine (pcp is still relitevely unheard of over here so i dont know much about it), we would destroy so much organised crime which is funded by the sale of these drugs. Not only that but as mentioned we could grow it ourselves and create jobs as well as the government taxing the drug.
The benefit for the taker is they would know what they were taking has not been mixed with crap but would be safer to take.
It can only be a matter of time before pot is legal over here. It has already been decriminilised (sp) and police turn a blind eye if your at a festival or an event. Even if your caught walking down the street the police will only take it off you and let you go, you might get a warning but even thats unllikely.
There are many people who go on tv and state they smoke it for medicimal reasons (things like ME or even bad arthritis).
Just think how many people die each year from alcohol and ciggerates. All the trouble in towns at the weekend is between drunken people after nights out. There are no recorded deaths from pot in this country and i have never known of a fight between two stoned people. Why can any government think it is bad?
Also by legalising you are cutting the chance of people trying harder drugs because they would not be in contact with dealers pushing it on to them.
Post by: Ween311 on July 19, 2004, 06:34:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| What would you think if the state gave herion and administered it through nurses and a safe needle exchange? |
My state actually has something similar to this. At the clinic, an addict can go and get "treatments." They are given a substance called methadone which is similar to heroin and have to be checked for needle marks. I don't know a lot about it, but hopefully the addict has to be in some kind of rehab program to be eligible. From what I have heard though, the methadone is harder to kick than heroin. I am all for the legalization of marijuana.
Post by: The unProfessional on July 19, 2004, 03:19:00 PM
Post by: thomes08 on July 19, 2004, 04:20:00 PM
PCP, crack, coke, heroin and all that stuff should definately be illegal. I drink, smoke pot, do shrooms, no longer acid, and other legal stuff like 2ci, dmt, dxm and i think pot should be legal. The other stuff i'm not so sure of though.
thomes08
Post by: Dark_Link2135 on July 19, 2004, 07:25:00 PM
| QUOTE (Colonel32 @ Jul 17 2004, 08:12 AM) |
| Dark_Link2135: Kerry has both a domestic and international plan to deal with Aids. You, or the sites you are using, are distorting the international plan. Kerry authored the best AIDS bill to pass through the senate, this is not just politics it's an issue he has been a big part of.. http://www.johnkerry...s/domestic.html and compare to: http://www.georgewbush.com/HealthCare/ BTW, it is GWB who wants to open the borders to illegal aliens, not Kerry. Whoever wrote your editorial doesn't seem to have a very good grasp on the platforms of the candidates. You should look for yourself at each of their websites and see which one makes sense to you. |
you people can have your own opinions. all we are doing now is saying the same thing over and over again. and once again, you are only coming off as childish and ignorant yourself when you call anyone who has an opnion different than yourself ignorant and childish. flaming gets you nowhere. i notice that i havnt been resorting to flaming as the only basis to my arguement.
anywho......theres not much left to say. ive said everything i possible have to say before....but finally someone responded to the kerry thing, and the utter stupidity (no offence, but you really do not know what you are talking about) of it needs to stand out....so here goes.
i dont agree with opening borders to anyone. thats the one of the things i hate about bush...his illegal alien policy. o boy, lets let more illegal mexicans in so i can dish out taxes to pay for their welfare that they are sucking up.
sounds like fun.
anywho....you are entirely contradictory to yourself.
id like to see you find an article that is NOT an editorial. any political artical is going to be a biased editorial slant on the issue.
this is kind of a side issue, but here you see again that kerry wanted to ban anyone with aids from coming into the united states....and now he wants to let them in. yet another example of how he tells people what they want to hear.
http://www.vote-smar...can_id=S0421103
http://www.johnkerry...s/domestic.html[/URL]
i had to dig to find it, since the democrats obviously know how stupid this is, and how much it would raise health insurance, so they gave it a very small place hoping people would read over it.....im sure you could find it in more detail, but ill go ahead and use the liberally biased links.
"John Kerry supports a comprehensive, science-based approach to prevention and reject discrimination against people with HIV/AIDS. He supports integrated care and prevention programs and will work to end the HIV travel and immigration ban. John Kerry will also end the federal ban on syringe exchange and harm reduction programs to prevent the spread of HIV."
sorry, you are wrong. and how the heck did we get to alcohol/drugs/violence?
lol, ive been gone the past 2 days, sorry.
also i dont see anything on aids in your link to bush's site. i do see a plan to lower health care costs though. were you supporting bush in your post? strange, you seem almost as flip-floppy as kerry.
i just love it when people supply links without reading them.
Post by: Colonel32 on July 19, 2004, 08:03:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| you people can have your own opinions. all we are doing now is saying the same thing over and over again. and once again, you are only coming off as childish and ignorant yourself when you call anyone who has an opnion different than yourself ignorant and childish. flaming gets you nowhere. i notice that i havnt been resorting to flaming as the only basis to my arguement. |
I wasn't flaming you at all
I linked you to the campaign site and also Bush's so that you can compare. Thats not biased at all. It's better to see what the candidate is saying than to get news from an editorial. The AIDS travel ban has nothing to do with opening up borders or citizenship.
| QUOTE |
| also i dont see anything on aids in your link to bush's site |
That was the point.
You seem to think Kerry allowing AIDS patients to be treated in America is a political move. Who is that going to be popular with ?
There was no disrespect there at all, I was trying to link you to the sources so you could see both the candidates stances because honestly the original post in this thread didn't make much sense to me in comparison to Kerry's legislations and Bush's public stance.
Did you not notice the
thing at the end. go back to this thread and count the number of people that called you names, i can't understand why you would have found my post offensive.
Post by: Dark_Link2135 on July 19, 2004, 08:10:00 PM
Post by: AkumAPRIME on July 28, 2004, 01:30:00 PM
Man dark link... Skate, Thomes and many others shouldn't spend time arguing with you. We live in a world where seeing someones name alot means there important, on the news, in magazines, on the net. But here, anyone and everyone can post a million times, put their name everywhere, and unfortunately, I think we fall for that " oh this guy must be somebody" Dark link and nemt are noone. The only things everyone has in common here is an opinion and an asshole. When you make comments like the one I pasted above, it shows how truly immature you are
ehb
Post by: melon on July 28, 2004, 04:22:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| ahh sorry, i wasnt intending to bash you. it was those other people who were bashing me on my opinon on fags |
That is highly offensive, for anyone.
Its akin to me mouthing off about coons or woks etc...
Post by: thomes08 on July 28, 2004, 05:53:00 PM
thomes08
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 29, 2004, 02:00:00 AM
Post by: gcskate27 on July 29, 2004, 02:57:00 AM
you and dark should get along famously...
Post by: Baner on July 29, 2004, 05:58:00 AM
| QUOTE (melon @ Jul 28 2004, 06:25 PM) |
| That is highly offensive, for anyone. Its akin to me mouthing off about coons or woks etc... |
It's not really the same at all. First off "Coons" and "Woks" can't help to be anything but what they are. Gays on the other hand, give nothing back as far as life. How is the world suppose to prosper if everyone is takin it up the arse. I'm not saying they're not hard workers, I'm just saying they can't give birth...
Post by: Arvarden on July 29, 2004, 06:02:00 AM
A close friend of my family died from AIDS couple of years ago . He went out on the razzle(as most red blooded males do on a weekend) and met a chick and took her back home for some kinky sex.
He woke up in the morning and his young lady friend had left. He went into the bathroom and noticed she had left him a message on his mirror with red lipstick.
"Welcome to the AIDS club"
On another note between 7 and 15 thousand(could be a little more) people in the UK are infected with this life threating disease and all/most of them dont know they are infected, therefore passing on the disease unknowingly.
Post by: melon on July 29, 2004, 06:08:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| It's not really the same at all. First off "Coons" and "Woks" can't help to be anything but what they are. Gays on the other hand, give nothing back as far as life. How is the world suppose to prosper if everyone is takin it up the arse. I'm not saying they're not hard workers, I'm just saying they can't give birth. |
Who is to say gay/lesbians have anything to do with it. My cousin was going out with a girl for years before he finally admitted to himself he was gay. I dont thnk it is a choice but genetics. How else can you explain butch lesbians and camp gays.
By your logic people who are infertile can not "give anything back", and are 2nd class citizens.
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 29, 2004, 08:52:00 AM
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 29, 2004, 08:57:00 AM
2Dont do drugs, they kill you anyway, even cigaretts do its proven but the ones that involve a needle and when rounds of heroin are going around blood on the needle is passed from person to person.
those are the top two i could think of. Also that must be pretty rare to be all of the sudden pricked by a needle by some sicko.
Post by: Baner on July 29, 2004, 08:57:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| "give anything back" |
as far as life.
I did not say they were second class workers. They are hard workers just like every other American ( ), but in no way are they helping for the future.
As for Mick... I'd suggest you stop while you can... i gotta feeling a sea of flames are comin your way.-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: melon on July 29, 2004, 12:37:00 PM
-
Baner re-read my last post.
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: OrkanMan on July 29, 2004, 04:54:00 PM
-
Melon: Mick actually goes out of his way to show proof behind the things he says.
You do not.
You are obnoxious...
And a waste of my time.
Good day.
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: gcskate27 on July 29, 2004, 05:07:00 PM
-
and banner, people cannot contribute further than procreating? what about medical, tech and scientific breakthroughs? what about art? are these not contributions? are these timeless "gifts" not important?
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: OrkanMan on July 29, 2004, 07:13:00 PM
-
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: gcskate27 on July 29, 2004, 07:17:00 PM
-
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: OrkanMan on July 29, 2004, 07:19:00 PM
-
how old are you by the way?
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: gcskate27 on July 29, 2004, 07:24:00 PM
-
whats your best guess? if you come close ill tell ya...
id say your around 17...
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 29, 2004, 11:07:00 PM
-
Aids is transfered by one gay person having sex with another, the tissue inside of the anus is very soft and not ment for, umm, fags to have fun with. So it tears the weak flesh and blood is internally exposed. thats how its transfered through the annal tissue. Nasty huh.
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: gcskate27 on July 29, 2004, 11:26:00 PM
-
same through vaginal sex... same for oral sex if there are open sores, cuts, whathaveyou...
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 29, 2004, 11:34:00 PM
-
This may be rude but let me ask you, wait know listen to me...
In order to reproduce humans have to mate. So a male and a female have sex. This may come to a surprize to you BUT a vagina is ment to have a penis in it. Do you really think an ASS is. The vagina can easiliy handle it because thats natural, unless you penis has blades on it. a rectum is made for crapping bodily wastes. I know its hard to believe it not ment for haveing sex with but beleive it!! its really true amazing!! And a mouth is tuff to, think about this, you can eat really spikey nachoes and not cut your mouth. Maybe you could do a test. Buy a dildo and have oral sex with it, did you cut youself?? And I dont think a woman would feal good having sex with a cut in her vagina, or mouth.
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 29, 2004, 11:54:00 PM
-
Things you should know
That article right there prevoked this liberals stupid uneducated reponse, what a moron.
An idiots email
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: gcskate27 on July 30, 2004, 02:31:00 AM
-
if you wanna believe its bad because the bible says so thats fine, but dont try to use it as proof...
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: melon on July 30, 2004, 02:37:00 AM
-
Its quite amusing really, you get bigged up for backing up your arguments then you post something as stupid as those two links! I do not accept evidence on this subject which is upto 26 years old.
The link you provided is mainly religous, yet he who is without sin may cast the first stone. I cant see how a person so full of hatred as yourself is without sin.
What happened to love thy neighbour?
If homosexuals are going to hell you could at least be nice, you can always be smug knowing when you die your off to heaven while they are not. Surely that is a reason to show compassion?
Finally you do realise in the animal kigdom buggery is rife and that a mans g-spot is up his arse!
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 30, 2004, 07:31:00 PM
-
HEY BUDDY, it says BESIDES FROM WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS! Not what the bible says, its funny you missed that part.
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 30, 2004, 07:50:00 PM
-
Homesexuals also piss me off because they get special treatment. I know first hand and have several examples I could share if you are interested. Thats one reason I do not agree with there lifestyle.
They also are a bunch of wusses, And they wont serve in the military because of it, and the poeple that work at places and are gay scare me so i dont go there. How would you like if if you walked down the street with some friend and these gay people come walking by and say "hey hotstuff". Oh wait i know what youd do youd say thanks cause you dont want to hurt their feelings.
Read This
Another article
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: thomes08 on July 31, 2004, 01:24:00 AM
-
mick.... i am unofficially declaring you the most ignorant person i've come in contact with. It's not even igrnorance.... It's like you're nemt's "bad" half PMS'ing while have a beach full of sand in your vagina. Then jesus crawled out from one of the dunes and told you to be as ignorant, annoying, and childish as you could possibly be, and if not, he'd let the world know how you touch yourself at night.
thomes08
P.S. it's natural don't worry about it
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: gcskate27 on July 31, 2004, 02:01:00 AM
-
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: gronne on July 31, 2004, 09:02:00 AM
-
Mike:
Sure, I got pissed about 2 years ago(I think) when a gay person grabbed my ass. I thought it was disgusting, he could've talked to me at least.
But the time I asked a lesbian in Kos (she was in my party so I knew she was a lesbian) if she wanted to fuck with me she got pretty pissed at me as well. Sure, I was drunk, and very horny, but wasn't I an equal asshole as the gay guy was to me? (Too much booze in my body I can go pretty nuts)
And it's very unfortunate that SHE of all girls is a lesbian as she looks gorgeous. We are still friends, but it's always embarrasing when I see her.
No matter what I do she won't become straight, so I was VERY stupid.
It's not like all homosexuals scream "hey hotstuff"(as you put it). It's about the INDIVIDUAL, not their sexual orientation.
I dislike YOU as a PERSON. Not because you're a christian. You know all christians don't offend me screaming "PRAISE THE LORD" walking down the street. Only the one's hating homosexuals, like you.
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: OrkanMan on July 31, 2004, 12:33:00 PM
-
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NIV): "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters, nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 31, 2004, 01:06:00 PM
-
I did not say they were second class workers. They are hard workers just like every other American (
), but in no way are they helping for the future.As for Mick... I'd suggest you stop while you can... i gotta feeling a sea of flames are comin your way.
Post by: melon on July 29, 2004, 12:37:00 PM
Baner re-read my last post.
Post by: OrkanMan on July 29, 2004, 04:54:00 PM
You do not.
You are obnoxious...
And a waste of my time.
Good day.
Post by: gcskate27 on July 29, 2004, 05:07:00 PM
and banner, people cannot contribute further than procreating? what about medical, tech and scientific breakthroughs? what about art? are these not contributions? are these timeless "gifts" not important?
Post by: OrkanMan on July 29, 2004, 07:13:00 PM
Post by: gcskate27 on July 29, 2004, 07:17:00 PM
Post by: OrkanMan on July 29, 2004, 07:19:00 PM
Post by: gcskate27 on July 29, 2004, 07:24:00 PM
id say your around 17...
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 29, 2004, 11:07:00 PM
Post by: gcskate27 on July 29, 2004, 11:26:00 PM
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 29, 2004, 11:34:00 PM
In order to reproduce humans have to mate. So a male and a female have sex. This may come to a surprize to you BUT a vagina is ment to have a penis in it. Do you really think an ASS is. The vagina can easiliy handle it because thats natural, unless you penis has blades on it. a rectum is made for crapping bodily wastes. I know its hard to believe it not ment for haveing sex with but beleive it!! its really true amazing!! And a mouth is tuff to, think about this, you can eat really spikey nachoes and not cut your mouth. Maybe you could do a test. Buy a dildo and have oral sex with it, did you cut youself?? And I dont think a woman would feal good having sex with a cut in her vagina, or mouth.
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 29, 2004, 11:54:00 PM
That article right there prevoked this liberals stupid uneducated reponse, what a moron.
An idiots email
Post by: gcskate27 on July 30, 2004, 02:31:00 AM
if you wanna believe its bad because the bible says so thats fine, but dont try to use it as proof...
Post by: melon on July 30, 2004, 02:37:00 AM
The link you provided is mainly religous, yet he who is without sin may cast the first stone. I cant see how a person so full of hatred as yourself is without sin.
What happened to love thy neighbour?
If homosexuals are going to hell you could at least be nice, you can always be smug knowing when you die your off to heaven while they are not. Surely that is a reason to show compassion?
Finally you do realise in the animal kigdom buggery is rife and that a mans g-spot is up his arse!
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 30, 2004, 07:31:00 PM
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 30, 2004, 07:50:00 PM
They also are a bunch of wusses, And they wont serve in the military because of it, and the poeple that work at places and are gay scare me so i dont go there. How would you like if if you walked down the street with some friend and these gay people come walking by and say "hey hotstuff". Oh wait i know what youd do youd say thanks cause you dont want to hurt their feelings.
Read This
Another article
Post by: thomes08 on July 31, 2004, 01:24:00 AM
thomes08
P.S. it's natural don't worry about it
Post by: gcskate27 on July 31, 2004, 02:01:00 AM
Post by: gronne on July 31, 2004, 09:02:00 AM
Sure, I got pissed about 2 years ago(I think) when a gay person grabbed my ass. I thought it was disgusting, he could've talked to me at least.
But the time I asked a lesbian in Kos (she was in my party so I knew she was a lesbian) if she wanted to fuck with me she got pretty pissed at me as well. Sure, I was drunk, and very horny, but wasn't I an equal asshole as the gay guy was to me? (Too much booze in my body I can go pretty nuts)
And it's very unfortunate that SHE of all girls is a lesbian as she looks gorgeous. We are still friends, but it's always embarrasing when I see her.
No matter what I do she won't become straight, so I was VERY stupid.
It's not like all homosexuals scream "hey hotstuff"(as you put it). It's about the INDIVIDUAL, not their sexual orientation.
I dislike YOU as a PERSON. Not because you're a christian. You know all christians don't offend me screaming "PRAISE THE LORD" walking down the street. Only the one's hating homosexuals, like you.
Post by: OrkanMan on July 31, 2004, 12:33:00 PM
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 31, 2004, 01:06:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| I guess not getting the same rights as straights qualifies as 'special treatment'. They do, they get enough rights to get job prefrences and making there marrages legal even though more people are aggainst it than for it. mick.... i am unofficially declaring you the most ignorant person i've come in contact with. It's not even igrnorance.... It's like you're nemt's "bad" half PMS'ing while have a beach full of sand in your vagina. Then jesus crawled out from one of the dunes and told you to be as ignorant, annoying, and childish as you could possibly be, and if not, he'd let the world know how you touch yourself at night. thomes08 P.S. it's natural don't worry about it |
thomes you are an idiot, talking about beachs in vaginas and touching yourself, Just because i am christian doent mean i have a vigina or a a beach in it. Jesus crawling out from a dune, that original. It sounds like your not a christian or a woman just someone whom fealls the need to write random thoughts about everthing he dipises. Seriously why dont you talk about things you beleive in give us the scoop and maybe some articles that you think make a point. Because as of now im the only one who has.
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 31, 2004, 01:16:00 PM
that homosexuals are a minority, since they make up only about
one or two per cent of the population. But minorities are
usually considered to be grouped based on characteristics over
which they have no control, like skin color, age and sex. But
the characteristic which sets homosexuals apart is their
behavior, which is very controllable."
Interesting
Just thought its was interesting
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 31, 2004, 01:21:00 PM
that homosexuals are a minority, since they make up only about
one or two per cent of the population. But minorities are
usually considered to be grouped based on characteristics over
which they have no control, like skin color, age and sex. But
the characteristic which sets homosexuals apart is their
behavior, which is very controllable."
Interesting
Something elese i found
Just thought its was interesting
Post by: gronne on July 31, 2004, 02:23:00 PM
How old are you Mick? 10? You're a PURE racist.
But it's nice that you're superior so you can lead our way. You SHOULD be banned and get a good beating while we're at it. Your opinions are not political, they're pure propaganda racism shit. I'm starting to hope there is a hell, because I've never been more certain about anything than that you'll be placed there. If there is a God(which there isn't), he CAN'T be that evil as you.
I really wish you were a homosexual for a day so you could learn what life really is about... You don't learn how to live from a damn book. For you are a slave under the bible. I AM FREE!!!
Post by: OrkanMan on July 31, 2004, 03:28:00 PM
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NIV): "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters, nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."
Gronne: Who are you to say that Mick is going to hell? I'm quoting scripture from the bible. The bible tells us that homosexuals are going to hell.
Honestly, think about it...why would homosexuals enter heaven? I know that talking about homosexuals is a touchy subject and luckily for us, God is the final judge on the matter...but why would God let a Christian homosexual enter the Kingdom of Heaven? There will be no homosexuals in heaven.
The bible says so....and I just showed you twice.
Post by: OrkanMan on July 31, 2004, 03:30:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| You don't learn how to live from a damn book. For you are a slave under the bible. I AM FREE!!! |
Free from what?
Doesn't it ever scare you to think that there may be a Hell?
Post by: gronne on July 31, 2004, 05:03:00 PM
| QUOTE (OrkanMan @ Jul 31 2004, 11:33 PM) |
| Free from what? Doesn't it ever scare you to think that there may be a Hell? |
That's what I'm free from, hypocritical BS. According to you everybody that don't believe in God will go to hell. Then I will be in the front with Hitler down there.
I think it's nice that you believe less than 30 % will go to heaven. You don't think muslims will go to their heaven, no, they will go to hell. You truly say that their religions are false, but not christianity.
You're all equally screwed. Why most people believe in God nowadays is probably out of fear from death. What will happen to the soul? I have no idea, I can't prove it just stops existing, and I wouldn't want it to either. But I'm certain it won't go to heaven nor hell.
And from the where-goes-the-soul-POV I can understand people believe in Gods, but to slave under the Bible and trying to claim right from wrong out of the bible is plain sick.
What happens to the soul when you die is probably the only thing I might wonder about, but I would only go nuts thinking about it. And I refuse to think it has anything to do with the bible, which was written when people thought the world was flat. I think Jesus could've enlightened us about this important aspect since God must know the world is round, right? Jesus was a part of God, and therefore he must've known it himself.
And as christians are a lot bigger assholes than I am, I'm absolutely certain a God can't accept you, I hope he doesn't, you don't deserve it. But, there is no God so you don't have to worry. If God accepts you he must be a greater asshole than the devil that apparently accepts moral people. So I should probably praise Satan then. You'd definitely say I'm already a part of him and now I'm spreading the great message of Satan, right? Thinking about it, I'm already standing in the lake of fire
But you go ahead and think it's right to kill iraqies(or should I say muslims?). By every day that goes I understand more and more why they attacked the WTC. I think it was very wrong, but the way you treat them it's still understandable from a religious POV (ONLY RELIGIOUS POV).
Post by: OrkanMan on July 31, 2004, 07:41:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| I think it's nice that you believe less than 30 % will go to heaven. |
| QUOTE |
| You don't think muslims will go to their heaven, no, they will go to hell. |
| QUOTE |
| But you go ahead and think it's right to kill iraqies(or should I say muslims?). |
| QUOTE |
| By every day that goes I understand more and more why they attacked the WTC. I think it was very wrong, but the way you treat them it's still understandable from a religious POV (ONLY RELIGIOUS POV). |
If you read my posts again, you'll find that I was only talking about homosexuals.
At no point in my posts did I mention muslims, the iraq war, or the WTC.
Which is proof that you ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS have to bring these things up...no matter what the conversation is.
Post by: OrkanMan on July 31, 2004, 07:59:00 PM
-Gronne
I stepped away from the computer for a few minutes and then it hit me.....how can someone actually say this?
"The way we treat them?" What is that supposed to mean?
Post by: thomes08 on July 31, 2004, 08:48:00 PM
Also all those things that you "didn't say" were implied through your other posts. If you don't belive in god you're going to hell. If you do this this this this and that you're going to hell. There is something like 6.2 billion people in the world and of those who have never done any of that, there are probably about 4.
thomes08
btw: mick, i have a point of view and i already expressed it about you. I don't need any biased false internet article to prove it.
Post by: OrkanMan on July 31, 2004, 09:00:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| open your eyes and mind, not the bible and you'll see. |
Thomes08, how long did it take you to come up with that? The topic of homosexuals has nothing to do with the WTC attacks.
Obviously you were jumping on the bandwagon here and tried come up with a clever remark about the bible........AND YOU COMPLETELY MISSED THE POINT.
Thank you for wasting my time.
Post by: Mattssogay on July 31, 2004, 09:14:00 PM
| QUOTE (OrkanMan @ Jul 31 2004, 05:31 PM) |
| Once again, I repeat... 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NIV): "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters, nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." There will be no homosexuals in heaven. The bible says so....and I just showed you twice. |
So you stated a quote that came from a book(bible). And since you Believe in the book that makes it right?
Then by the same token if I find a quote in the Alcoran that I believe in then that must be right too?
Just because you were taught something doesnt make it right or true.Same thing with reading things.
Your logic is ludicrous.Lets just say there is this religion called HarryPotteran. Now my churches are huge and we all believe in wizards and witches.And in our scripture it says that all you non believers will be slain by Lord Voldemort.Does that make it true? No. But i can go onto the internet to what ever BBS I want and tell everyone I want that they are going to be slain By Lord Voldemort unless they come repent at their local HarryPotteran church.
heres a quote from a book I believe in(From The Prophet by Kahlil Gibran):
"Who can separate his faith from his actions, or his belief from his occupations?"
And he who defines his conduct by ethics imprisons his song-bird in a cage.
"The freest song comes not through bars and wires. "
"Your daily life is your temple and your religion."
Whenever you enter into it take with you your all.
Take the plough and the forge and the mallet and the lute,
The things you have fashioned in necessity or for delight.
For in revery you cannot rise above your achievements nor fall lower than your failures.
"AND TAKE WITH YOU ALL MEN:"
For in adoration you cannot fly higher than their hopes nor humble yourself lower than their despair.
And if you would know God be not therefore a solver of riddles.
Rather look about you and you shall see Him playing with your children.
And look into space; you shall see Him walking in the cloud, outstretching His arms in the lightning and descending in rain.
You shall see Him smiling in flowers, then rising and waving His hands in trees."
Post by: OrkanMan on July 31, 2004, 09:20:00 PM
then...
I said: "The way we treat them?" What is that supposed to mean?
then...
You said: open your eyes and mind, not the bible and you'll see.
Even if you don't believe in God or Christianity, the bible still serves as a book that will only make you a better person. Isn't it the Ten Commandments that teach us not to lie, steal, kill, or covet?
Perhaps you should read more of the bible.
And by the way, your comment was in no way, shape, or form relevant to anything we were talking about. It had nothing to do with homosexuals and it had nothing to do with the world trade center attacks. It was your way of trying to cleverly sneak in a comment about my faith as a Christian and only served as a way to get your point across on how you feel about Christianity.
You've wasted my time...but I do hope you read more of the bible.
Good night.
EDIT: This was in response to Thomes08.
Post by: OrkanMan on July 31, 2004, 09:33:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| So you stated a quote that came from a book(bible). And since you Believe in the book that makes it right? |
I believe the bible to be 100% true.
| QUOTE |
| Then by the same token if I find a quote in the Alcoran that I believe in then that must be right too? |
They can't both be true. I choose to believe the bible.
Galatians 6:7-9: " Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. 8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting. 9 And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not."
John 12:47-48: "And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day."
Each of us will die someday. And then we'll find out the truth.
Post by: Mick Garvey on July 31, 2004, 11:37:00 PM
Post by: gronne on August 01, 2004, 05:14:00 AM
| QUOTE (OrkanMan @ Aug 1 2004, 04:02 AM) |
| By every day that goes I understand more and more why they attacked the WTC. I think it was very wrong, but the way you treat them it's still understandable from a religious point of view... -Gronne I stepped away from the computer for a few minutes and then it hit me.....how can someone actually say this? "The way we treat them?" What is that supposed to mean? |
Sure, I went off-topic, but it related to what I also think all immoral christians believe in. (That's not implying ALL christians are immoral, absolutely not).
Now Orkan, what did I mean with that? I did say that I didn't like it, the attacks were horrible, but I can understand them from a RELIGIOUS POV. But I think what USA is doing in Iraq is A WHOLE LOT worse. Especially as Iraq had nothing to do with the WTC-attacks.
USA have always treated the mid-east and all muslims like shit. And when they retaliate, THEY are the bastards
Unconditioned love to a God is ALWAYS dangerous. It blinds you from any reality. Had it not been because of how immoral religions make people I wouldn't mind it much, but now it does, and it kills people. And it makes Homo's believe they're worth less.
A slight example of how sick extreme conviction can be: In Gothenburg(Sweden) there was a black person who somehow got in connection with nazi's(No idea why they wanted him around), and a few years later he was a notorious Nazi, which obviously included that he hated all black people. So he cut his penis off, that way he couldn't make his race greater
Now that's SICK. Now HOW is it possible to debate with a person who thinks 100% of the bible is true?
Post by: thomes08 on August 01, 2004, 08:50:00 AM
Then there are the jews and muslims who are all going to hell right? But they think you're going to hell. I'm going to hell i guess, and so is everyone who doesn't believe jesus is our savior. So explain to me without a closed mind who isn't going to hell.
OK...... then i took 2 geology classes title "the history of the earth 1 and 2". And if note 100% of the bible was proven wrong, a good 99% of it was, at least on the subject of evolution. I'm guessing you're still living at home, but when/if you go out to vollege i urge you to take both history and geology classes to get a different point of vuew on things.
thomes08
P.S. I went to church every sunday and xmas eve till i was 11, nice try though in assuming that everyone who isn't a bible thumper doesn't have a clue what it's about.
Post by: nemt on August 01, 2004, 03:45:00 PM
| QUOTE (thomes08 @ Aug 1 2004, 12:53 PM) |
| OK...... then i took 2 geology classes title "the history of the earth 1 and 2". And if note 100% of the bible was proven wrong, a good 99% of it was, at least on the subject of evolution. |
That's interesting, perhaps you should look up the bombardier beetle, and invest in a copy of Darwin's Black Box. The story of creation almost certainly is a fabrication, most likely invented to explain something man at the time had no way of explaining. This, however, does not mean the theory of evolution has any more credability.
Post by: thomes08 on August 01, 2004, 05:32:00 PM
thomes08
Post by: nemt on August 01, 2004, 05:35:00 PM
| QUOTE (thomes08 @ Aug 1 2004, 09:35 PM) |
| we have scientific evidence proving evolution |
We as in who? Do you and your buddy Frank know something the global scientific community doesn't?
Post by: thomes08 on August 01, 2004, 05:40:00 PM
Post by: nemt on August 01, 2004, 05:45:00 PM
| QUOTE (thomes08 @ Aug 1 2004, 09:43 PM) |
| i can't take classes for you nemt |
While some form of evolution is most likely the explanation for human life, scientists have yet to agree on or even formulate a widely accepted theory. Additionally, almost all of Darwin's theory, aside from the general concept, has been disproven.
You should take the classes for yourself, you don't seem to know much about biology or politics.
Post by: thomes08 on August 01, 2004, 05:52:00 PM
thomes08
Post by: thomes08 on August 01, 2004, 05:54:00 PM
Post by: gronne on August 01, 2004, 06:07:00 PM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Aug 2 2004, 01:48 AM) |
| Additionally, almost all of Darwin's theory, aside from the general concept, has been disproven. |
Show me some links. He might have been wrong about some things, I'm sure. But we should consider he was THE pioneer, and the theory of evolution has evolved
very well. I remember scientists for a long time thinking Darwin was wrong about the dolphins actually being land creatures before they went back to the sea(think it was this way, could've been in another way), but like 5 years ago he turned out to be right. Says pretty a lot to me. But he was probably wrong about other stuffs, but as long as we fix his faults I'm happy.
Post by: melon on August 02, 2004, 03:37:00 AM
Just like Aristotle in the "book of heavens" concluded the world was round but thought the sun and the other planets orbited around it.
Later Ptolemy created a model of orbits of the universe whit the Earth at the centre, although the orbital paths were spheres.
Later again a priest called Copernicus decided that the sun was the centre and all things orbited around it.
Kepler modified Copernicus' theory to state that the orbital paths were actually elipses.
Then the greatest Scientist ever added his say.
Newtons, Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica provided a complex mathematical sytstem to show how and why the thoery of keplers was correct. This was based on the push and pull forces produced by gravity.
Finally Hubble tweaked Newton's theory to explain that the universe is constantly expanding.
Darwin created a theory and like Aristotle the basic principle was correct, as more tecnological advances became available Darwins theory has been modified, that does not mean it is wrong.
Post by: moistness on August 03, 2004, 07:19:00 PM
| QUOTE (xFusioNx @ Jul 31 2004, 11:14 PM) |
| I never ever, ever touch the subject of religion. I'll comment on politics all day long, even though it's a sore subject, but religion, that shit is like the plague. I dont even want near it.... but you bible thumping fucks have brought me out to brave the storm. You know that bible that you rely on so much? It's a fucking FAIRY TALE. I'm sorry to say it, but I only speak the truth. Just to give you an idea, of why: Did you ever pay attention in grade school to those Native American creation stories? The ones that explain how things came to be in the world according to them? Well that's what the Bible is like. It's the Christian creation story. Same with all the other religious scriptures from around the world. All these documents are, are guidelines to live a good life in the eyes of their original authors. That's all. They arent something to fight and kill over. They are points of reference. I'm a firm believer in evolution. Go to the zoo and you can see why too. I don't believe in a "God", but I think there is something out in the universe that got things started, something that is beyond human comprehension at this time and is the reason we are here today. It's not some Zeus like figure sitting in "Heaven" dictating who comes in and who gets the boot like some sort of dance club with a VIP list. Personifying your beliefs is something people have done for millenia, the Native Americans had their creation stories, the greeks had their Gods, as did the romans, and so on and so forth. All the Bible is, is a book to outline the Christian creation story and set down guidelines to keep people in line, and give those weak of heart and mind, something to aspire to. This isnt necessarily bad, but it's too hardline. They should be points of reference, not militant schedules that condemn all others not following it. People need to start thinking with their own minds instead of looking to ancient references for the focal point of their lives. |
I actually opened a nice cold bud to drink to that post!!
My thoughts and beliefs to a tee!
Post by: Dark_Link2135 on September 02, 2004, 04:40:00 PM
| QUOTE (xFusioNx @ Aug 3 2004, 10:24 PM) |
| Look, evolution is the truth, one persons theory on how it works can be disproven, but evolution on the whole is undeniable. The evidence is everywhere. And please don't say biblical evidence is everywhere either. Remember a few years back when they exhausted millions looking for "The Ark"? That's money that could've been spent on something like curing cancer, or teating ailing children. All over something from a stupid book. BEFORE YOU EVEN COMMENT ON THIS POST... Refer to the second post on page 9. (my post) It explains everything. |
sorry for bringing up an age old arguement, but i seem to be on a role here, so heres my response
throughout this entire thread you have said "the evidence is everywhere" but have not once mentioned where this evidence is, even when questioned about it. this is because their IS no evidence for macroevolutoin. microevolution can be proven, because we can see it.
macroevolution is not scientific, because you cannot test it. evolutoin IS deniable. i dont know what you have been brainwashed with, but this is why it is called the Evolutionary Theory. it is a theory and nothing but.
its really sad when the scientific community has been able to brainwash people into thinking a theory is 100% truth. people will do anything to deny the existence of God.
Post by: thomes08 on September 02, 2004, 05:04:00 PM
I suggest taking a "Historical Geology" class and it will prove to you that there is more than enough evidence to show evolution exists.
I would bet that on the first day of class you will be presented with somethign similar to this "We are sorry if your religious beliefs differ from what you learn in this class. What we are presenting to you is science and if you have a problem with that this class may not be for you". At least every class like this at Purdue will present you with that.
thomes08
Post by: nemt on September 03, 2004, 11:33:00 AM
Additionally, you should research the bombardier beetle before championing the works of Darwin. Evolution is just a theory, and while it has more scientific evidence supporting it than anything in the bible, it's far from perfect, and far from provable.
Post by: pug_ster on September 03, 2004, 12:34:00 PM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Sep 3 2004, 07:36 PM) |
| It's impossible to prove something doesn't exist through scientific method. Additionally, you should research the bombardier beetle before championing the works of Darwin. Evolution is just a theory, and while it has more scientific evidence supporting it than anything in the bible, it's far from perfect, and far from provable. |
I remember in High School Biology that there are some students may 'leave' when they teach Darwin and the Evolution. I guess your mom didn't want you to learn it huh?
I think the Bible is the most abused tool of propaganda for the last 2000 years. It was 'used' to prove that Slavery was okay during the time of Slavery. Before man found out that disease was caused by Bacteria and virus, it was used to prove that diseases was caused by 'satan.' So I guess it has a lot to say why evolution doesn't exist, right?
The thing is that you can't disprove it because whomever wrote it is not here anymore.
Post by: nemt on September 03, 2004, 01:09:00 PM
| QUOTE (pug_ster @ Sep 3 2004, 04:37 PM) |
| I remember in High School Biology that there are some students may 'leave' when they teach Darwin and the Evolution. I guess your mom didn't want you to learn it huh? |
"...that there are some student may leave when..." Well, your inability to construct a sentence won't stop my reply.
I've taken numerous courses in biology and biochemistry, and I've read several books on the subject. My mom has nothing to do with my beliefs, scientifically or religiously. It just so happens, I am not a Christian, nor do I believe in the creationist vision, and I respect Darwin, his theories and his research. I do not, however, respect those attacking the beliefs of others baselessly, on false assumptions, such as Darwin's theory being considered scientific canon - which just isn't true.
| QUOTE (pug_ster @ Sep 3 2004, 04:37 PM) |
| I think the Bible is the most abused tool of propaganda for the last 2000 years. It was 'used' to prove that Slavery was okay during the time of Slavery. |
Actually, the abolitionist movement was founded based on Judeo-Christian ideals, and religious leaders opposed slavery all throughout history. There are plenty of reasons to cite the bible as being used for propaganda purposes, but saying it was used to "prove Slavery was okay" is just idiotic.
| QUOTE (pug_ster @ Sep 3 2004, 04:37 PM) |
| Before man found out that disease was caused by Bacteria and virus, it was used to prove that diseases was caused by 'satan.' So I guess it has a lot to say why evolution doesn't exist, right? |
The bible was never used to prove "diseases was caused" by anything. Religious leaders often suggested sin was the cause of illness, but this belief goes back before the time of Jesus. Every culture up until very recently believed disease, famine, plague, was all caused by actions taken to anger their gods. Additionally, Louis Pasteur, the man who pioneered the scientific movement to recognize the true nature of disease was a devout Christian. Also, the bible never mentions evolution; the idea of evolution wasn't introduced until centuries later. You need to stop confusing the word of religious leaders with the word of the bible.
| QUOTE (pug_ster @ Sep 3 2004, 04:37 PM) |
| The thing is that you can't disprove it because whomever wrote it is not here anymore. |
That's okay; don't let the facts stand in the way of your opinion.
Post by: Yuyu on September 03, 2004, 01:28:00 PM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Sep 3 2004, 02:12 PM) |
| That's okay; don't let the facts stand in the way of your opinion. |
Oops, did he say that...
Post by: pug_ster on September 03, 2004, 03:26:00 PM
| QUOTE (Yuyu @ Sep 3 2004, 09:31 PM) |
| Oops, did he say that... |
I am saying that you can't disprove the person who wrote the Bible because this person is probably not alive.
Post by: Maximumbeing on September 03, 2004, 04:03:00 PM
I checked out the bombardier beetle, as far as I can see, only christians seem to think this to be defining evidence of the flaws in evolution. None of us know how the beetle came about it's defense mechanism, but if it was that way since the beginning, wouldn't something have evolved a way to stop it by now?
No defense last forever, it has to continually evolve.
Post by: Yuyu on September 03, 2004, 04:09:00 PM
| QUOTE (pug_ster @ Sep 3 2004, 04:29 PM) |
| I am saying that you can't disprove the person who wrote the Bible because this person is probably not alive. |
He was not disproving the person who wrote the Bible, he was disproving the idiots that mangle the Bible's words, into whatever suits their situation/religion best. If people would just do as the Bible says and not as they think the Bible says, religion would not be so frowned upon all the time. For me it boils down to this. Don't be a fuk. If you are a fuk, ask for forgiveness anytime and you shall receive it. JC died on the cross for you. I am. Thats about it really, yet people write whole books on how to be a better follower. This shit gets so old...
My main question to anyone of any religion that believes in God or otherwise. Does he love you more than me for being the way you are, and me being the way I am?
Didn't think so...
Post by: Maximumbeing on September 03, 2004, 04:11:00 PM
:-D
Post by: Yuyu on September 03, 2004, 04:17:00 PM
| QUOTE (Maximumbeing @ Sep 3 2004, 05:14 PM) |
| He loves all his children the same amount, some he just chooses to send to fire and damnation! :-D |
And to what extent does he actually send people to hell? Who are we to judge who has been "bad" enough to go there? I would guess that God tries to save as many, if not all of the people he creates from going there. That's why hell is so lonely, there is not too many poeple there I would think. The way I see it, if Jeffrey Dahmer asked for forgiveness 5 minutes before he died, he went to heaven....
Post by: pug_ster on September 03, 2004, 04:43:00 PM
| QUOTE (Yuyu @ Sep 4 2004, 12:12 AM) |
| He was not disproving the person who wrote the Bible, he was disproving the idiots that mangle the Bible's words, into whatever suits their situation/religion best. If people would just do as the Bible says and not as they think the Bible says, religion would not be so frowned upon all the time. For me it boils down to this. Don't be a fuk. If you are a fuk, ask for forgiveness anytime and you shall receive it. JC died on the cross for you. I am. Thats about it really, yet people write whole books on how to be a better follower. This shit gets so old... My main question to anyone of any religion that believes in God or otherwise. Does he love you more than me for being the way you are, and me being the way I am? Didn't think so... |
That is the belief of a Christian. Other religions have a different prespective of what is the relation between a person and his/her god.
Unfortunately, there are many people in the US who are not Christians and/or believe Christian beliefs should stay out of the government. Bush wants to push out his Pro-Church agendas like Anti-abortion and anti-gay agendas in the Election. The government should respect those beliefs who are not Christians.
Many deeply-religious Middle-East Muslims feel threatened by Bush's not just because they 'want to take over Middle East.' But also, Middle-East muslims feel threatened about Christian beliefs being spread there. So that is why you see so many of these Jihadists who is willing to die just to have a chance to kill one of us.
Post by: jonathan2007 on September 03, 2004, 05:58:00 PM
| QUOTE (Yuyu @ Sep 4 2004, 12:20 AM) |
| And to what extent does he actually send people to hell? Who are we to judge who has been "bad" enough to go there? I would guess that God tries to save as many, if not all of the people he creates from going there. That's why hell is so lonely, there is not too many poeple there I would think. The way I see it, if Jeffrey Dahmer asked for forgiveness 5 minutes before he died, he went to heaven.... |
That is one of the saddest things I have ever heard.
You do not go to Hell just because you are bad and you do not goto heaven for being good. You must have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ in order to go to heaven. A personal relationship is not just trying to be a good person. It is loving the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind - Mark 12:30. How can you say the Bible is boring. Have you read the entire thing. I highly doubt it. The Bible is the most exciting story that has ever and will ever be written. | QUOTE |
| Jhn 10:10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have [it] more abundantly. |
Jesus came and died on the cross for our sins. He never sinned not even once. But yet God gave his only Son so that we may have eternal life.
| QUOTE |
| Jhn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. |
There is a very good site from a Christian viewpoint about science. The address is http://www.answersingenesis.org/ This site also has an article about the Bombardier Beetle found at http://www.answersin...7/i1/beetle.asp It is a very well written article and I sincerely hope you will read it. My best regards, Jonathan.
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: jonathan2007 on September 03, 2004, 07:10:00 PM
-
Post by: jonathan2007 on September 03, 2004, 07:10:00 PM
| QUOTE (xFusioNx @ Sep 3 2004, 06:54 PM) |
| I can name HUNDREDS that disprove the bible and the existence of God. Or at least the existence of a "God" the way the bible describes it. |
please do.
Post by: jonathan2007 on September 03, 2004, 08:07:00 PM
| QUOTE (Colonel32 @ Sep 4 2004, 03:30 AM) |
| we can see stars therefore the Earth is much older than the bible says it is. |
that doesn't prove the earth is older than the Bible says.
Post by: Maximumbeing on September 03, 2004, 08:46:00 PM
You saw my arguement for why the beetle isn't substancial when it comes to "answering genesis".
Post by: xFusioNx on September 03, 2004, 09:23:00 PM
This is what I found and it makes sense to me.
I think that it makes sense because people can't explain or even FATHOM how something like that evolved from anything, but.. there are other strange things out there that have evolved into what they are now. Sure this sounds extremely unlikely to have evolved, but that only because our knowledge of the creature is limited to what we see now, not any of it's predecessors.
Post by: Yuyu on September 03, 2004, 09:49:00 PM
| QUOTE (jonathan2007 @ Sep 3 2004, 07:01 PM) |
| You must have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ in order to go to heaven. A personal relationship is not just trying to be a good person. It is loving the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, strength, and mind - Mark 12:30. |
So what if that dawns on you five minutes before you die, that means you still go to heaven, correct? Calling me stupid for interpreting the Bible another way than you, that is stupid. You criticize the way I choose to excercise my faith? Sounds like you're a christian, act like one, oh wait, you are acting like a modern christian, you go around telling other christians how they are worshiping the Bible the wrong way... While you're at it, go ahead and tell me I'm going to hell, since you know, I don't have the same way of thinking as you.
Post by: Yuyu on September 03, 2004, 09:55:00 PM
| QUOTE (pug_ster @ Sep 3 2004, 05:46 PM) |
| Bush wants to push out his Pro-Church agendas like Anti-abortion and anti-gay agendas in the Election. The government should respect those beliefs who are not Christians. |
See my only problem with that statement, is it can't be done. If we respected others "beliefs" all the time, then people like those nice ones from Waco, Texas, could just keep doing what they are doing. We can't tell them it's wrong, according to there religion its ok. Oh and those little Jihads people like to do nowadays, thats ok too, seeing as though in their minds, according to their religion, it is ok. Well, crap, I'm off to start my own religion, we'll have a human sacrifice every Friday. Don't tell me it's wrong though, we need to respect my rights here...
Post by: Yuyu on September 04, 2004, 12:06:00 AM
| QUOTE (ZeroDown @ Sep 3 2004, 11:59 PM) |
| What? Seperation of Church and State can't happen? There is a bit of a difference from religions that don't go around and, oh I don't know, KILL PEOPLE and others that do. |
Problem is, to realistcally seperate the two, would mean that religions could do whatever they wanted. The founder's of this country expected others to worship their own form of christianity, not a terd in a toilet if they please. I hate the fact that our country has turned into a bunch of people who crap on the ideas the country was founded on.
Post by: Maximumbeing on September 04, 2004, 06:08:00 AM
In fact, I think most of our founding fathers were deists.
Post by: jonathan2007 on September 04, 2004, 07:41:00 AM
| QUOTE (Yuyu @ Sep 4 2004, 05:52 AM) |
| So what if that dawns on you five minutes before you die, that means you still go to heaven, correct? Calling me stupid for interpreting the Bible another way than you, that is stupid. You criticize the way I choose to excercise my faith? Sounds like you're a christian, act like one, oh wait, you are acting like a modern christian, you go around telling other christians how they are worshiping the Bible the wrong way... While you're at it, go ahead and tell me I'm going to hell, since you know, I don't have the same way of thinking as you. |
I'm not trying to call you stupid for how you believe. But do you honestly believe someone will go to heaven just for being good.
| QUOTE |
| Acts 4:12 There is salvation in no one else! There is no other name in all of heaven for people to call on to save them." |
| QUOTE |
| Mar 8:38 If a person is ashamed of me and my message in these adulterous and sinful days, I, the Son of Man, will be ashamed of that person when I return in the glory of my Father with the holy angels. |
| QUOTE |
| Eph 2:8 God saved you by his special favor when you believed. And you can't take credit for this; it is a gift from God. 9 Salvation is not a reward for the good things we have done, so none of us can boast about it. |
Those 3 passages show that a person must have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ in order to obtain eternal life. Salvation is a gift from God. We are not worthy enough to be able to goto Heaven on our own. We need Jesus. Nobody including me can judge whether a person truly knows Jesus Christ as their Lord and personal Savior. Only God can do that. And Jesus said if you deny or do not acknowledge him on Earth he will not acknowledge you in Heaven and you will be sent into the Lake of Fire forever. And if a person truly does repent on the death bed that they sinned and they need forgiveness only found in Jesus Christ and then confess Him as their Lord and Savior then they will go to Heaven. But will that person have as great of a reward as a person who has suffered their whole life for the cause of Christ?? No, they will not be blessed as much.
| QUOTE |
| Job 42:12 So the Lord blessed Job in the second half of his life even more than in the beginning. For now he had fourteen thousand sheep, six thousand camels, one thousand teams of oxen, and one thousand female donkeys. 13 He also gave Job seven more sons and three more daughters. 14 He named his first daughter Jemimah, the second Keziah, and the third Keren-happuch. 15 In all the land there were no other women as lovely as the daughters of Job. And their father put them into his will along with their brothers. |
God blessed Job many many times over what he had originally had. How much greater will our reward in Heaven be for following God our entire lives.
-
Title: John Kerry Latest Stupidity
Post by: pug_ster on September 04, 2004, 09:45:00 AM
-
Post by: pug_ster on September 04, 2004, 09:45:00 AM
| QUOTE (Yuyu @ Sep 4 2004, 05:58 AM) |
| See my only problem with that statement, is it can't be done. If we respected others "beliefs" all the time, then people like those nice ones from Waco, Texas, could just keep doing what they are doing. We can't tell them it's wrong, according to there religion its ok. Oh and those little Jihads people like to do nowadays, thats ok too, seeing as though in their minds, according to their religion, it is ok. Well, crap, I'm off to start my own religion, we'll have a human sacrifice every Friday. Don't tell me it's wrong though, we need to respect my rights here... |
You forgot to mention the crazy polygamist mormans who still live in Utah. Here's an interesting link about 'alternative' religions or cults
Some of them are kind of weird or satanic...http://altreligion.about.com/
You forgot to mention that in the US, you must respect the law. As far as I know, killing or attempting to kill someone else is illegal
Post by: The unProfessional on September 04, 2004, 01:11:00 PM
| QUOTE |
You forgot to mention that in the US, you must respect the law. As far as I know, killing or attempting to kill someone else is illegal |
That's the whole point. In a true separation of church and state, murder under religious motive is ok. This example is obvious, of course... the gov't should have the right to control homicide. But, where is the line drawn?
And the average american does crap on the values on which this country was founded. Look at the whole fiasco with the ten commandments. Despite being a religious symbol, they stand for civil and moral order, and the basis on which our justice system was founded. People just had to raise hell about it, though... after all these years.
Life has gotten too easy for Americans. We're running out of sh*t to bitch about.
Post by: Yuyu on September 04, 2004, 01:43:00 PM
| QUOTE (ZeroDown @ Sep 4 2004, 02:30 PM) |
| But separation of church and state was never set up to be that extreme. If any of us had 'true freedom' we could do whatever we wish. And for the 'line', it is drawn when harm to any person is taking place. And thats when we run into abortion and homosexuallity. |
Well the line was not drawn clearly enough I guess? Both of those things exist in our modern society and it isn't breaking the law. And you have to have all or none. If you only seperate a little, you are still retaining the chritian values it was based upon.
Post by: Yuyu on September 04, 2004, 01:54:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| I'm not trying to call you stupid for how you believe. But do you honestly believe someone will go to heaven just for being good. |
I didn't say you have to just be good, I did say you have to believe in JC.
| QUOTE |
| Acts 4:12 There is salvation in no one else! There is no other name in all of heaven for people to call on to save them." |
TO me all that says is this, you have to ask for JC to save you. Again, I said that.
| QUOTE |
| Mar 8:38 If a person is ashamed of me and my message in these adulterous and sinful days, I, the Son of Man, will be ashamed of that person when I return in the glory of my Father with the holy angels. |
I am freely admitting that I believe in JC now, doesn't mean I have to be the ay other christians around me are.
| QUOTE |
| Eph 2:8 God saved you by his special favor when you believed. And you can't take credit for this; it is a gift from God. 9 Salvation is not a reward for the good things we have done, so none of us can boast about it. |
SO in other words, don't be a conceited chritian and dictate to others how they should be saved and worship? I really don't believe in a "correct" way to heaven, that so many people try to preach nowadays.
Post by: The unProfessional on September 04, 2004, 01:55:00 PM
| QUOTE |
If you only seperate a little, you are still retaining the chritian values it was based upon. |
I'm entirely non-religious, and I find the line to be quite appropriate. It's not good enough for everybody (hence the constant bitching), but some religious values often provide us with good moral code. The reason abortion is such a hot topic is because it literally falls ON the 'line'. As for homosexuality, I think it's strictly a Christian dilemma, and religious zealots will eventually give in.
Post by: The unProfessional on September 04, 2004, 02:24:00 PM
| QUOTE |
What would that be? Any religious values I have been taught I would have seen as common sense otherwise. Morals differ person to person depending who taught them or how they were learned. |
I suppose I'm not giving the average American enough credit. You are correct in saying that such moral codes are provided to us by merely common sense. Somehow they still fail.
Post by: nfs911 on September 04, 2004, 03:42:00 PM
Post by: jonathan2007 on September 04, 2004, 05:24:00 PM
| QUOTE (Yuyu @ Sep 4 2004, 09:57 PM) |
| I didn't say you have to just be good, I did say you have to believe in JC. TO me all that says is this, you have to ask for JC to save you. Again, I said that. I am freely admitting that I believe in JC now, doesn't mean I have to be the ay other christians around me are. SO in other words, don't be a conceited chritian and dictate to others how they should be saved and worship? I really don't believe in a "correct" way to heaven, that so many people try to preach nowadays. |
But just believing is not good enough. You need to live a life honoring to God and you need to do your best to follow all of His commands. Even the demons and Satan believe that there is a God (for after all Satan used to be an angel until he was cast out of Heaven for wanting to be God) but are the demons saved? Of course not. So just believing is not enough. Only God can judge the desires of a man's heart.
Post by: Maximumbeing on September 04, 2004, 06:15:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Everyone says Bush is stupid but hes not, only idiot ignorant liberals say that hes stupid becasue they know that if they were in office they couldn't do a better job. |
So we ignorant liberals say that Bush is stupid because we think we couldn't do a better job?... If you were trying to come across as an idiot, you are heard loud and clear.
Wir lieben Bush.
Wir lieben Krieg.
Wir lieben Deutschland!
Post by: nemt on September 04, 2004, 07:32:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Bush is a total moron, you know...a complete idiot, but he managed to steal the election and dupe the entire world with his ingenius web of Iraq lies. Oh, and he should free Mumia. |
Post by: thomes08 on September 05, 2004, 10:24:00 AM
| QUOTE (nfs911 @ Sep 4 2004, 11:45 PM) |
| " I voted for the $87 billion tax cut before I voted agianst it" HMHMHMHM Anyone else see that Kerry is kinda saying dumb things? Everyone says Bush is stupid but hes not, only idiot ignorant liberals say that hes stupid becasue they know that if they were in office they couldn't do a better job. Did you see all the riots at the republican convention, the republican convention had ALOT more riots compaed to the Democratic convention. Republicans have more class than democrats. All you stupid liberals want to take $ from the rich and give to the poor. The the fricken poor peoples fault that they didnt make use of themself and get a job. Just becasue some people are rich and sucessfull, doesnt mean you have to take their $. |
there are so many parts in this post that point to the fact that you are a spoiled, sheltered 12 year old girl with no understanding of how anything in the "real world" works except for your Barbie Convertable.
| QUOTE |
| " I voted for the $87 billion tax cut before I voted agianst it" HMHMHMHM Anyone else see that Kerry is kinda saying dumb things? |
yeah that statement is dumb, but what about all the things your guy says? It's like you're trying to bring the attention to the fact that Bush is known for saying dumb things.
| QUOTE |
| Everyone says Bush is stupid but hes not, only idiot ignorant liberals say that hes stupid.. |
Whether you think bush is stupid or not is up to you, but you just referred to a group just as large as yours as all being ignorant idiots. That's a pretty ignorant and idiotic thing to say don't you agree?
| QUOTE |
| ... becasue they know that if they were in office they couldn't do a better job. |
Since i'm trying not to take a liberal standpoint here, if you are in fact over 15 and remember the 8 years the last idiot ignorant liberal was in office, think about the state of our country then. Were you happy, were your parents doing well, was the economy well, was the country as divided as it was today, did you have friends forced to kill people overseas for no reason? Face it there's going to be more idiot ignorant liberal presidents in your day, and once you're old enough you may even get the chance to vote against one.
| QUOTE |
| Did you see all the riots at the republican convention, the republican convention had ALOT more riots compaed to the Democratic convention. |
The democratic convention was in kerry's home, democratic state surrounded by people who support him. Bush on the otherhand went to New York City. A city in which he has over 6 million people who don't like him. Trust me more than 1 in 6 liberals HATE BUSH with a passion. So you have at least 1 million people who HATE this man, while 5 million don't like him at all, and he decides to have his convention there. If kerry came to hickville texas and took over the city there i'm sure there would be PLENTY of protestors.
Please respond to what i just said i want to know if you have any understanding on why there were protestors there. Do you have any understanding of this? Not even the other republicans on this forum are confused by why there were protestors.
| QUOTE |
| Republicans have more class than democrats. |
all i can say is if that OPINION is somehow a true fact, i hope you're not using yourself as an example of class. Are you?
| QUOTE |
| All you stupid liberals want to take $ from the rich and give to the poor. |
classy argument there buddy:-)
| QUOTE |
| The the fricken poor peoples fault that they didnt make use of themself and get a job. |
this is the main reason you sound like a little girl. You have absolutely NO IDEA what it's like to struggle do you. Tell us, have you ever had to work for anything? Have you ever had to put food on the table for your family? Have you ever had to do that while tring to earn an education? have you ever had a real uphill struggle before in your life? A serious one too, not just somethign challenging. You have no idea of the fact that not all people have it as good as you obviously have it, some people have to work harder than the rich people just to be able to feed their son. Think about that, ass
| QUOTE |
| Just becasue some people are rich and sucessfull, doesnt mean you have to take their $. |
there are plenty of rich people who aren't sucessfull. Bush is one in my opinion. Think about before he was president or governor, he was very well off but in no was sucessfull. His political career aside because that's what this is all about.
It's good to know you define success by money. Shows you know what it's like to be a stuggling american, and shows you have a lot of class.
thomes08
Post by: pug_ster on September 05, 2004, 03:26:00 PM
| QUOTE (nfs911 @ Sep 4 2004, 11:45 PM) |
| " I voted for the $87 billion tax cut before I voted agianst it" HMHMHMHM Anyone else see that Kerry is kinda saying dumb things? Everyone says Bush is stupid but hes not, only idiot ignorant liberals say that hes stupid becasue they know that if they were in office they couldn't do a better job. Did you see all the riots at the republican convention, the republican convention had ALOT more riots compaed to the Democratic convention. Republicans have more class than democrats. All you stupid liberals want to take $ from the rich and give to the poor. The the fricken poor peoples fault that they didnt make use of themself and get a job. Just becasue some people are rich and sucessfull, doesnt mean you have to take their $. |
For one thing, get the facts straight, it is about 87 billion on the 'Reconstruction' of Iraq, not tax cuts. I guess dumbasses like you failed to see the reason why Kerry voted against the 87 billion. He voted against because he don't want to give a 'blank check' to the Bush Administration unless they write in detail what it is going to be spending. Guess what? About 10% of the money (that's 8.8 billion) was unaccounted for.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5763483/
Maybe if the Bush adminstration have the brains of saying what are they going to spend it on Iraq, maybe Kerry would've said yes. I rather have a president who made a dumb remark about spending my tax dollars than a President who's too dumb to spend my tax dollars.
Post by: melon on September 06, 2004, 12:58:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Anyone else see that Kerry is kinda saying dumb things? Everyone says Bush is stupid but hes not, only idiot ignorant liberals say that hes stupid becasue they know that if they were in office they couldn't do a better job. Did you see all the riots at the republican convention, the republican convention had ALOT more riots compaed to the Democratic convention. Republicans have more class than democrats. |
How exactly are liberals ignorant? Liberals dont want a future where the country is controlled by corporations that can change the Law to allow them to force people into poverty, just to give greater profit margins for the company and its senior management.
Well thats already happened but when you see a president making it a lot worse and teking there freedom they are pissed off. The fact so many people demonstrated against Bush shows how hated he is. In this country roughly for every 20 people that hated Tony Blair 1 went to protest. Presuming that statistic is same in the US that is a lot of people.
And Clinton was no angel but your country was in a far better state when it was under his control.
| QUOTE |
| All you stupid liberals want to take $ from the rich and give to the poor. |
Dont forget rescuing Maid Marrion along the way
Seriously, just for manual workers like cleaners and waitress' to get a wage they can actually live on, or for people to be able to afford to live in a house instead of a trailer. How about a health service everyone can use, and if your child dies from cancer or not isnt based on your bank balance.
| QUOTE |
The the fricken poor peoples fault that they didnt make use of themself and get a job. Just becasue some people are rich and sucessfull, doesnt mean you have to take their $. |
This this is where you show your brilliant mind and total grasp of politics, sociology, economics, and educational theory.
Congratulations on showing me how snobbish, selfish, and ignorant of the "real", world spoilt, rich kids are.
Post by: pug_ster on September 07, 2004, 03:37:00 PM
http://www.thedubyar...com/quotes.html
Post by: nemt on September 08, 2004, 08:32:00 AM
| QUOTE (no one @ ever) |
| Bush is eloquent. |
Post by: Yuyu on September 08, 2004, 09:18:00 PM
Bush is eloquent.
exactly
Post by: nemt on September 09, 2004, 10:15:00 AM
| QUOTE (Yuyu @ Sep 9 2004, 12:21 AM) |
| QUOTE (no one @ ever) Bush is eloquent. exactly |
..but there's also a consequential quote:
| QUOTE (no one @ ever) |
| Eloquence equates intelligence and leadership ability. |
Post by: pug_ster on September 09, 2004, 10:27:00 AM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Sep 9 2004, 06:18 PM) |
| ..but there's also a consequential quote: |
I think you meant Laura Bush:)
http://journals.aol....Jen/entries/945
In W's speech at the RNC, does this sound Eloquent to you?
| QUOTE |
| People sometimes have to correct my English I knew I had a problem when Arnold Schwarzenegger started doing it. Some folks look at me and see a certain swagger, which in Texas is called "walking." |
Post by: nemt on September 09, 2004, 10:37:00 AM
| QUOTE (pug_ster @ Sep 9 2004, 01:30 PM) |
| I think you meant Laura Bush:) http://journals.aol....Jen/entries/945 |
What the hell are you talking about? Shouldn't you be at your local middle school learning something?
Post by: thomes08 on September 09, 2004, 11:44:00 AM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Sep 9 2004, 06:40 PM) |
| What the hell are you talking about? Shouldn't you be at your local middle school learning something? |
good one
Post by: pug_ster on September 09, 2004, 11:44:00 AM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Sep 9 2004, 06:40 PM) |
| What the hell are you talking about? Shouldn't you be at your local middle school learning something? |
I was at Middle School 20+ years ago. I thought you said that Laura Bush is Eloquent.
Maybe you refer Eloquent Bush as this:)
http://www.usvisanew.../memo2003.shtml
BTW, if you don't notice by now, I am joking.
Post by: nemt on September 09, 2004, 12:08:00 PM
| QUOTE (pug_ster @ Sep 9 2004, 02:47 PM) |
| I was at Middle School 20+ years ago. |
Could've fooled me. You have the intelligence and comprehension of a sixth grader.
| QUOTE (pug_ster @ Sep 9 2004, 02:47 PM) |
| I thought you said that Laura Bush is Eloquent. |
I don't think anything I've said in any thread in this entire forum could be used to suggest that.
| QUOTE (pug_ster @ Sep 9 2004, 02:47 PM) |
| Maybe you refer Eloquent Bush as this:) http://www.usvisanew.../memo2003.shtml |
I never said anyone was eloquent...maybe in your haste to lookup the word "eloquent" on dictionary.com, you missed everything else I've said in my posts.
| QUOTE (pug_ster @ Sep 9 2004, 02:47 PM) |
| BTW, if you don't notice by now, I am joking. |
BTW, don't quit your job at Denny's to do standup.
Post by: pug_ster on September 09, 2004, 12:23:00 PM
| QUOTE (nemt @ Sep 9 2004, 08:11 PM) |
| I never said anyone was eloquent...maybe in your haste to lookup the word "eloquent" on dictionary.com, you missed everything else I've said in my posts. BTW, don't quit your job at Denny's to do standup. |
Boy, I am just making jokes at this forum and you seem to be as Angry as that senile Zell MIller.
I am sure that Denny's offer internet access to employees so a person like me can reply to your posts.