AJC.com > Opinion > Woman to Woman > Archives > 2006 > February > 17 > Entry
Why didn’t Europe’s prior tolerance of Muslims prevent the current uproar?
Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, responds.
Shaunti Feldhahn, a right-leaning columnist, writes the commentary this week and Diane Glass, a left-leaning columnist, responds.
Commentary
A lot of Europeans have been wondering, recently, how things could have gone so wrong. In previous years they’ve watched from afar as the flag of the “arrogant” U.S. was burned, secure in their tolerant, live-and-let-live approach to the millions of conservative Muslims immigrating into their midst.
But now it is their flags being burned; they who are wondering why that tolerance did not build up some goodwill, did not protect them from such an angry, violent response to simple expressions of free speech.
The reasons are complex, but I think Europeans underestimated two things: the degree to which their brand of tolerance may have actually led to some of the anger instead of preventing it, and the degree to which the radical Islamist system prevents the building of goodwill in the first place.
There is a type of tolerance that looks down on those who have strongly held, different beliefs. In other words, it tolerates only those who agree, and comes across as arrogant and condescending to everyone else. Or, at the very least, it “tolerates” and puts up with those who are different instead of truly welcoming and assimilating them. Being on the receiving end – as millions of European Muslims feel they have been – builds not goodwill but resentment and anger.
Since many average Muslims haven’t been truly integrated into the host culture (the fault of both sides), and haven’t felt part of the same team, simmering resentments can easily explode. Especially when the stricter elements of Muslim culture are unused to satire, power-sharing, or the offensive exercise of free speech.
And this leads to the second fact that all those tolerant Europeans didn’t really understand: that many of those stricter Muslim leaders – those with political, Islamist agendas – don’t want assimilation and will do everything possible to prevent it and fan the flames instead. Consider this startling fact: of the 1,200 Muslim imams (preachers) in France, three-quarters are foreigners who know nothing of the French culture – and more than a third don’t even speak the language.
Europe’s “live and let live” tolerance has dangerously misunderstood the Islamist world, simply giving radicals all the space they need to undermine their host countries.
Rebuttal
One of Shaunti’s arguments rests on the presumption that you can’t rationalize with the irrational. My point exactly — although my reasons differ. This issue isn’t about politics; it’s about religion.
“Muslims hold sacred the memory of the Prophet. For the West, the freedom of the individual is paramount, explains Dr. Ivan Strenski, Religious Studies Professor at the University of California. “As long as we look past the depth of the clash over what is sacred, we are unlikely to avoid similar disturbances to our social peace.”
But I’d also argue the problem isn’t solely about what is sacred, it’s how we interpret the sacred.
Religious laws encounter the same scrutiny as secular laws. And it’s the literal interpretation of religious texts behind much of religious extremism. This is likely why Shaunti assumes “the radical Islamist system prevents the building of goodwill.”
However, assuming Muslims are the only religion with radical sub-groups is short-sighted. Every Muslim doesn’t support violence anymore than all Christians support the murder of abortion clinic doctors. That said, there is still the reality that many Muslims do tend toward literalism more than your average Westerner. While there are Christian literalists like best-selling author Timothy LeHay, who believe in the “lakes of fire” and “golden roads,” described in the Bible, most Christians interpret these biblical references allegorically. In contrast, many Muslims hold the Koran as the pure word of Allah.
Herein lies the problem: what’s sacred is debatable and what’s debatable is no longer sacred.
There are no easy answers here. Religious beliefs should be respected but they shouldn’t hold political sway. When we start making concessions for one religious group, we forfeit neutrality and muddy the waters separating secular law from religious belief.
“Modern day religion emphasizes correct beliefs at the expense of a rich experiential life,” Strenski observes, and unfortunately for us, religious literalists only seem to observe arcane details. As a Buddhist precept reminds us: “religions and sages are fingers pointing to the same moon.” What lesson can we learn from this? We should look where the fingers are pointing, not worship the finger.
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By candide
February 17, 2006 08:20 AM | Link to this
You cannot deal with Islam through tolerance. Islam must be banned from Europe and America. Freedom of religion is a nice Idea but sometimes it has to be curtailed. All Muslims should be deported back to Muslim lands. There is no place for them in free, modern societies.
After we get rid of Islam we can start getting rid of Christianity. Last will come Judaism. Finally we would be free of primitive semitic religion.
By Brian Curtis
February 17, 2006 08:24 AM | Link to this
Huh. This time I’m afraid I must disagree with both Shaunti AND Diane.
The problem isn’t “why tolerance hasn’t worked;” it’s the assumption that Western culture has been practicing “tolerance” in the first place.
The U.S. is the most Christian nation of all western civilization… but it’s also an economic and culture powerhouse that’s never withheld from enforcing its will on every other nation in sight. In that regard, it’s no surprise that we’re targeting first and foremost when retaliation inevitably comes.
But Europe is likewise a participant in both western culture and (to a significant degree) western economic-policy dominion over the rest of the globe. Together, the U.S. and Europe have relentlessly spread, not democracy, but capitalism and western culture everywhere we tromp. And when native people object, we tend to do awkward things like prop up dictators, sponsor (or squash) revolutions, and murder people who might interfere with “our” interests… in their country.
Gee; I wonder if that could provoke any resentment?
Then there’s the cultural angle. It seems inconceivable to us, but there may be people who don’t particularly WANT a Wal-Mart and McDonald’s on every corner; who don’t WANT their society’s structure and services dictated by the forces of free-market capitalism (with no regard for what they see as higher, more moral principles); and who don’t WANT to have American/European values shoved at them night and day in an orgy of ‘consume or die’ messages.
So if they try to block these things from their borders, what happens? They’re swifly condemned as “anti-democracy” and hit with economic sanctions, World Bank bullying, WTO strongarm tactics, and perhaps a CIA hit squad or two.
Sure, the U.S. has been the worst offender in this area… but hasn’t Europe as a whole been a clear co-conspirator in the drive to overwhelm and extinguish all other cultures and lifestyles—by marketing if possible, by economic and military force if necessary?
By Randy
February 17, 2006 08:29 AM | Link to this
Candide = Norman, the nutcase that use to post here. This person is close to insane.
By Randy
February 17, 2006 08:39 AM | Link to this
To find out why people behave the way that they behave. You first need to look at where they are. The way I see it is simple, Muslims are very religious which is good. However, 99% of them are poor, live in the desert, barely eck out an existance. This makes them easy to be lead by nutcases, like Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein etc. These men don’t believe in a creator(or they wouldn’t do what they do), they do recognize an opportunity when they see it. By using the muslims faith as a uniting tool, to get their agenda accomplished. Maybe if the average muslims standard of living was higher they would see through this manipulation and be more peaceful. I’m a Christian, but if some Christian leader started talking about destroying something or killing somebody, my and probably 99.99999% of other Christians would say, “that’s is the way Jesus taught” and we would dismiss that person as a “NUT”.
By Randy
February 17, 2006 08:40 AM | Link to this
I mean “that is not the way Jesus taught”.
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 08:59 AM | Link to this
Umm, is this their way of trying to stifle our joke day?
By RF
February 17, 2006 09:05 AM | Link to this
sooooo, what happened here?? Did it get that bad this morning?
By Brian Curtis
February 17, 2006 09:06 AM | Link to this
I’m not sure why the new topic’s here already, but you can always access the previous discussion with those “Recent Column” links at the bottom.
And commenting is still open on THAT one too! Odd.
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this
I dunno what happened… :-( I was just looking for some jokes.
I’m really in need of some laughs today…
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 09:09 AM | Link to this
I suspect they’ll realize it and close commenting on one or the other shortly.
Too bad we didn’t lose the nuts in the transition.
By Mara
February 17, 2006 09:09 AM | Link to this
Per Shaunti - “There is a type of tolerance that looks down on those who have strongly held, different beliefs. In other words, it tolerates only those who agree, and comes across as arrogant and condescending to everyone else. Or, at the very least, it “toleratesâ€? and puts up with those who are different instead of truly welcoming and assimilating them. Being on the receiving end – as millions of European Muslims feel they have been – builds not goodwill but resentment and anger.” Wow, substitute “millions of American Democrats” for the phrase “millions of European Muslims…” and we get the the real reason for liberal angst.
By candide
February 17, 2006 09:27 AM | Link to this
Let Randy be the first Christian we deport.
By Angie
February 17, 2006 09:31 AM | Link to this
A young man once asked God how long a million years was to him.
God replied, “A million years to me is just like a single second to you.”
The young man asked God what a million dollars was to him.
God replied, “A million dollars to me is just like a single penny to you.”
Then the young man got his courage up and asked, “God, could I have one of your pennies?”
God smiled and replies, “Certainly, just a second.”
By Julia
February 17, 2006 09:32 AM | Link to this
A young woman teacher with obvious liberal tendencies explains to her class of small children that she is an atheist. She asks her class if they are atheists too. Not really knowing what atheism is but wanting to be like their teacher, their hands explode into the air like fleshy fireworks. There is, however, one exception. A beautiful girl named Lucy has not gone along with the crowd. The teacher asks her why she has decided to be different. “Because I’m not an atheist.”
Then, asks the teacher, what are you?
“I’m a Christian.” says Lucy.
The teacher is a little perturbed now, her face slightly red. She asks Lucy why she is a Christian. “Well, I was brought up knowing and loving Jesus. My mom is a Christian, and my dad is a Christian, so I am a Christian.”
The teacher is now agitated. “That’s no reason,” she says forcefully. “What if your mom was a moron, and your dad was a moron. What would you be then?”
A pause, and a smile. “Then,” says Lucy, “I’d be an atheist.”
By Jack K
February 17, 2006 09:33 AM | Link to this
Little Johnny watched, fascinated, as his mother smoothed cream on her face. “Why do you do that, mommy?” he asked. “To make myself beautiful,” said his mother, who then began removing the cream with a tissue. “What’s the matter?” asked Little Johnny. “Giving up?”
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 09:33 AM | Link to this
Brian Curtis - I cannot add to your great post. I once was an InternationalDevelopment major, thinking I could help the Third World. But between the World Bank and IMF, considered it a stacked-deck. Robert McNamara and many others in the late 60s decided they really did not want to engage in Vietnam-style wars, and worked out enforcing our Worship The Dollar culture via economic action instead of military action.
Playboy had a nice article on that exact(WorldBank) action last year sometime, it was not anything new to me but…
so much for joke-day today? LOL
By Julia
February 17, 2006 09:34 AM | Link to this
As you are receiving my note by e-mail, it’s wise to remember how easily this wonderful technology can be misused, sometimes unintentionally, with serious consequences. Consider the case of the Illinois man who left the snow-filled streets of Chicago for a vacation in Florida. His wife was on a business trip and was planning to meet him there the next day.
When he reached his hotel, he decided to send his wife a quick e-mail. Unable to find the scrap of paper on which he had written her e-mail address, he did his best to type it in from memory. Unfortunately, he missed one letter, and his note was directed instead to an elderly preacher’s wife, whose husband had passed away only the day before.
When the grieving widow checked her e-mail, she took one look at the monitor, let out a piercing scream, and fell to the floor in a dead faint. At the sound, her family rushed into the room and saw this note on the screen:
Dearest Wife, Just got checked in. Everything prepared for your arrival tomorrow. Signed, Your eternally loving husband. PS. Sure is hot down here.
By Jack K
February 17, 2006 09:35 AM | Link to this
Five-year-old Becky answered the door when the census taker came by. She told the census taker that her daddy was a doctor and wasn’t home because he was performing an appendectomy. “My,” said the census taker, “that sure is a big word for such a little girl. Do you know what it means?” “Sure do! Fifteen-hundred bucks, and that doesn’t even include the anesthesiologist!”
By Jack K
February 17, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this
An Irishman, a Mexican and a redneck were doing construction work on the scaffolding of a tall building. They were eating lunch. The Irishman said, “Corned beef and cabbage! If I get corned beef and cabbage one more time for lunch, I’m going to jump off this building.” The Mexican opened his lunch box and exclaimed, “Burritos again! If I get burritos one more time, I’m going to jump off too.” The redneck opened his lunch and said, “Bologna again. If I get a bologna sandwich one more time, I’m jumping too.”
The next day the Irishman opens his lunch box, sees corned beef and cabbage and jumps to his death. The Mexican opens his lunch, sees a burrito and jumps too. The redneck opens his lunch, sees the bologna and jumps to his death as well.
At the funeral, the Irishman’s wife is weeping. She says, “If I’d known how really tired he was of corned beef and cabbage, I never would have given it to him again!” The Mexican’s wife also weeps and says, “I could have given him tacos or enchiladas! I didn’t realize he hated burritos so much.”
Everyone turned and stared at the redneck’s wife. “Hey, don’t look at me,” she said. “He makes his own lunch.”
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this
Jack K stole(oops, sorry, beat me to it) my March Playboy Party Joke today, Okay, ize gutz more. LOL
That was one of the ones I selected for today.
By Jack K
February 17, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this
This 85 year old couple, having been married almost 60 years, die in a car crash. They had been in good health the last ten years, mainly due to the wife’s neurotic interest in health food. When they reached the pearly gates, St. Peter took them to their mansion, which was decked out with a beautiful kitchen and master bath suite and Jacuzzi. As they “oohed and aahed”, the old man asked Peter how much all this was going to cost. “It’s free,” Peter replied, Remember, this is Heaven.” Next they went out back to see the championship golf course the home backed up to. They would have golfing privileges every day, and each week the course changed to a new one representing the great golf courses on Earth. The old man asked, “What are the green fees?” “This is heaven,” St. Peter replied. “You play for free.” Next they went to the clubhouse and saw the lavish buffet lunch with the cuisines of the world laid out. “How much to eat?” asked the old man. “Don’t you understand yet?” St. Peter asked. “This is heaven. It’s free!” “Well, where are the low fat and low cholesterol foods?” the old man asked timidly. “That’s the best part…you can eat as much as you like of whatever you like and you never get fat and you never get sick. This is Heaven.” The old man looked at his wife and said, “You and your damned bran muffins. I could have been here ten years ago!”
By Jack K
February 17, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this
My wife invited some people to dinner. At the table, she turned to our six-year-old daughter and said, “Would you like to say the blessing? “I wouldn’t know what to say,” she replied. “Just say what you hear Mommy say,” my wife said. Our daughter bowed her head and said: “Dear Lord, why on earth did I invite all these people to dinner?”
By Jack K
February 17, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this
A couple, both 67, went to a sex therapist’s office. The doctor asked, “What can I do for you?” The man said, “Will you watch us have sexual intercourse?”
The doctor looked puzzled, but agreed. The doctor examined them and then directed them to disrobe and go at it. When the couple finished, the doctor reexamined them and, upon completion, advised the couple, “There’s nothing wrong with the way you have intercourse.” He then charged them $32.
This happened several weeks in a row. The couple would make an appointment, have intercourse with no apparent problems other than the lack of vigor which is to be expected in 67 year olds, get dressed, pay the doctor, and then leave.
Finally after almost two months of this routine, the doctor asked, “Just exactly what are you trying to find out?”
The old man said, “Oh, we’re not trying to find out anything. She’s married and we can’t go to her house. I’m married, so we can’t go to my house. The Holiday Inn charges $60. The Hilton charges $78. We do it here for $32 and I get $28 back from Medicare.
By Jack K
February 17, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this
There once was a young couple who lived in a town filled with crime. After three neighbors’ houses had been robbed. The couple decided to get a guard dog. So one day the wife went to the pet store and said ‘I need a good guard dog.’ And the clerk replied ‘Sorry, we’re all sold out, all we have left is this little Scottie dog. But he knows karate.’ The wife didn’t believe him so he said to the dog, ‘Karate that chair.’ The dog went up to the chair and broke it into pieces, then he said to the dog ‘Karate that table.’ The dog went up to the table and broke it in half. So the wife bought the dog and took it home to her husband who was expecting a big guard dog. But then she told her husband that it knew karate, and he said ‘Karate my a-s-s!’ …to this very day he is still in the hospital.
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 09:40 AM | Link to this
compliments of March Playboy Party Jokes.
A kid was sitting on his lawn with a box of newborn puppies when George W. Bush came by on his morning run. Bush asked the boy what the puppies were.
The boy said, “Republicans”.
The President beamed, patted the boy on the head and said, “Thatta boy”.
A few weeks later Bush was jogging again, this time with Dick Cheney in tow. Bush stopped at the boy’s house, winked at Dick, and said. “Hey, kid, what kind of puppies are in the box?”
The boy said, “Democrats”.
Bush looked crushed and said “What happened? A few weeks ago they were Republicans”.
“Well,” the boy said, “that was before they opened their eyes”.
By The72John
February 17, 2006 09:40 AM | Link to this
Possibly you misunderstand the purpose of Joke Day, Julia…it’s to aleviate the regular day-to-day bashing of each other. Please refrain from posting further derogatory jokes, OK?
Personally, I think YOU’RE the moron, but that’s just me.
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this
Hilarious!!!!!! I’m lovin it!
By Julia
February 17, 2006 09:47 AM | Link to this
Mind Games Dogs Play With Humans
After your humans give you a bath, DON’T LET THEM TOWEL DRY YOU! Instead, run to their bed, jump up and dry yourself off on the sheets. This is especially good if it’s right before your humans bedtime.
Act like a convicted criminal. When the humans come home, put your ears back, tail between your legs, chin down and act as if you have done something really bad. Then, watch as the humans frantically search the house for the damage they think you have caused. (Note: This only works when you have done absolutely nothing wrong.)
Let the humans teach you a brand new trick. Learn it perfectly. Then the humans try to demonstrate it to someone else, stare blankly back at the humans. Pretend you have no idea what they’re talking about.
Make your humans be patient. When you go outside to go ‘pee,’ sniff around the entire yard as your humans wait. Act as if the spot you choose to go pee will ultimately decide the fate of the earth.
Draw attention to the human. When out for a walk always pick the busiest, most visible spot to go ‘poo.’ Take your time and make sure everyone watches. This works particularly well if your humans have forgotten to bring a plastic bag.
When out for a walk, alternate between choking and coughing every time a strange human walks by.
Make your own rules. Don’t always bring back the stick when playing fetch with the humans. Make them go and chase it once in a while.
Hide from your humans. When your humans come home, don’t greet them at the door. Instead, hide from them, and make them think something terrible has happened to you. (Don’t reappear until one of your humans is panic-stricken and close to tears).
When your human calls you to come back in, always take your time. Walk as slowly as possible back to the door.
Wake up twenty minutes before the alarm clock is set to go off and make the humans take you out for your morning pee. As soon as you get back inside, fall asleep. (Humans can rarely fall back asleep after going outside, this will drive them nuts!)
By RF
February 17, 2006 09:48 AM | Link to this
Jack K and Chilao— keep ‘em coming! Toooo funny!!!
By Jack
February 17, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this
Take your Friday nice pill John.
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this
Don’t ask gramdma
Lawyers should never ask a Southern grandma a question if they aren’t prepared for the answer.
In a trial, a Southern small-town prosecuting attorney called his first witness, a grandmotherly elderly woman, to the stand.
He approached her and asked, “Mrs. Jones, do you know me?”
She responded, “Why, yes, I do know you, Mr. Williams. I’ve known you! since you were a young boy and frankly, you’ve been a big disappointment to me. You lie, you cheat on your wife, you manipulate people and talk about them behind their backs. You think you’re a big shot when you haven’t the brains to realize you never will amount to anything more than a two-bit paper pusher. Yes, I know you!”
The lawyer was stunned! Not knowing what else to do, he pointed across the room and asked, “Mrs. Jones, do you know the defense attorney?”
She again replie d, “Why, yes, I do. I’ve known Mr. Bradley since he was a youngster, too. He’s lazy, bigoted, and he has a drinking problem. He can’t build a normal relationship with anyone and his law practice is one of the worst in the entire state. Not to mention he cheated on his wife with three different women. One of them was your wife. Yes, I know him.” The defense attorney almost died.
The judge asked both counselors to approach the bench and in a very quiet voice said, “If either of you b?stards asks her if she knows me, I’ll jail your sorry ?sses for contempt.”
By blablabla
February 17, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this
Mara,
liberal angst is probably caused by a lot of things, but it likely has little to do with conservatives thumbing their noses at libs. the party in power tends to be condescending toward the out of favor party. that’s not new.
if the libs would come up with some original ideas and market themselves with a cohesive message that is something other than “we hate bush”, conservatives would have to take them more seriously bc they’d be a threat to actually win an election. as of now, they’re still not, despite the how poorly bush has bungled a number of issues.
my guess is the bulk of that angst you’re feeling is caused by the frustration at having been out of power in all three branches of gov’t for running on five years. if one compares the political landscape in this country today to where it was in 1980, the dems have been soundly trounced by the gop at the state and federal level. my guess is the pendulum will start swinging the other way in the next ten years or so.
By Mara
February 17, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this
Ok. missed the agreement about jokes so mistakenly posted an opinion item. I’ll make amends by posting a joke now…
A few months ago, there was an opening with the CIA for an assassin. These highly classified positions are hard to fill, and there’s a lot of testing and background checks involved before you can even be considered for the position. After sending some applicants through the background checks, training and testing, they narrowed the possible choices down to two men and a woman, but only one position was available.
The day came for the final test to see which peson would get the extremely secretive job. The CIA men administering the test took one of the men to a large metal door and handed him a gun. "We must know that you will follow our instructions whatever the circumstances," they explained. "Inside this room, you will find your wife sitting in a chair. Take this gun and kill her." The man looked horrified and said, "You can't be serious! I could never shoot my wife!" "Well," said the CIA man, "you're definitely not the right man for this job then." So they brought the second man to the same door and handed him a gun. "We must know that you will follow instructions no matter what the circumstances," they explained to the second man. "Inside you will find your wife sitting in a chair. Take this gun and kill her." The second man looked a bit shocked, but nevertheless took the gun and went in the room. All was quiet for about 5 minutes; then the door opened. The man came out of the room with tears in his eyes. "I tried to shoot her; I just couldn't pull the trigger and shoot my wife. I guess I'm not the right man for the job." "No," the CIA man replied, "You don't have what it takes. Take your wife and go home." Now they only had the woman left to test. They led her to the same door to the same room and handed her the same gun. "We must be sure that you will follow instructions no matter what the circumstances; this is your final test. Inside you will find your husband sitting in a chair. Take this gun and kill him." The woman took the gun and opened the door. Before the door even closed all the way, the CIA men heard the gun start firing, one shot after another for 13 shots. Then all hell broke loose in the room. They heard screaming, rashing, and banging on the walls. This went on for several minutes; then all went quiet. The door opened slowly, and there stood the woman. She wiped the sweat from her brow and said, "You guys didn't tell me the gun was loaded with blanks. I had to beat the son of a b*** to death with the chair!"By lozen
February 17, 2006 10:28 AM | Link to this
A few days ago we celebrated both Groundhog Day and the State of the Union Address. As Air America Radio pointed out, “It is an ironic juxtaposition: one event involved a meaningless ritual in which we look to a creature of little intelligence for prognostication and the other event involved a groundhog.”
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 10:30 AM | Link to this
LOL
By lozen
February 17, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this
A man was sick and tired of going to work every day while his wife stayed home. He wanted her to see what he went through so he prayed: “Dear Lord: I go to work every day and put in 8 hours while my wife merely stays at home. I want her to know what I go through, so please allow her body to switch with mine for a day. Amen. God, in his infinite wisdom, granted the man’s wish. The next morning, sure enough, the man awoke as a woman. He arose, cooked breakfast for his mate, awakened the kids, set out their school clothes, fed them breakfast, packed their lunches, drove them to school, came home and picked up the dry cleaning, took it to the cleaners and stopped at the bank to make a deposit, went grocery shopping, then drove home to put away the groceries, paid the bills and balanced the check book. He cleaned the cat’s litter box and bathed the dog. Then it was already 1 P.M. and he hurried to make the beds, do the laundry, vacuum, dust, and sweep and mop the kitchen floor. Ran to the school to pick up the kids and got into an argument with them on the way home. Set out milk and cookies and got the kids organized to do their homework, then set up the ironing board and watched TV while he did the ironing. At 4:30 he began peeling potatoes and washing vegetables for salad, breaded the pork chops and snapped fresh beans for supper. After supper, he cleaned the kitchen, ran the dishwasher, folded laundry, bathed the kids, and put them to bed. At 9 P.M. he was exhausted and, though his daily chores weren’t finished, he went to bed where he was expected to make love which he managed to get through without complaint. The next morning, he awoke and immediately knelt by the bed and said, “Lord, I don’t know what I was thinking. I was so wrong to envy my wife’s being able to stay home all day. Please, oh please, let us trade back.” The Lord, in his infinite wisdom, replied, “My son, I feel you have learned your lesson and I will be happy to change things back to the way they were. You’ll just have to wait nine months, though. You got pregnant last night.”
Voted Women’s Favorite Email of the Year
By blablabla
February 17, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this
A few days ago we celebrated both Groundhog Day and the State of the Union Address. As Air America Radio pointed out, “It is an ironic juxtaposition: one event involved a meaningless ritual in which we look to a creature of little intelligence for prognostication and the other event involved a groundhog.�
lozen, for a party that prides itself on its intelligence, it must kill you guys not to be able to beat such a moron. that’s the source of the angst, mara. the libs can’t even beat a bumbling boob. i’d be frustrated too if i were a liberal.
By Jack
February 17, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this
Kerry would have been so much better.
By lozen
February 17, 2006 10:50 AM | Link to this
Pet Rules Dear “Pet”: When I say to move, it means to go someplace else, not switch positions so you are still in the way. The dishes with the paw print are yours and contain your food. The other dishes are mine and contain my food. Please note, placing a paw print in the middle of my plate and food does not stake a claim for it becoming your food and dish, nor do I find that aesthetically pleasing in the slightest. The stairway was not designed by NASCAR and is not a racetrack. Beating me to the bottom is not the objective. Tripping me doesn’t help, because I fall faster than you can run. I cannot buy anything bigger than a king size bed. I am very sorry about this. Do not think I will continue to sleep on the couch or adjust my sleeping positions to ensure your comfort. Look at videos of “Pets” sleeping; they can actually curl up in a ball. It is not necessary to sleep perpendicular, stretched out to the fullest extent possible. I also know that sticking your tail straight out to maximize space used is nothing but sarcasm and will not be tolerated. My compact discs are not miniature Frisbees. For the last time, there is no secret exit from the bathroom. If by some miracle I beat you there and manage to get the door shut, it is not necessary to scratch, cry, or get your paw under the edge and try to pull the door open. When I exit this room, I will come out the same door I entered. In addition, I have been using bathrooms for years. “Pet” attendance has never been necessary. The proper order is kiss me, then go clean your butt. I cannot stress this enough. It would be such a simple change for you. In return for your following these simple rules, I will post the following message on our front door: Rules for Non-Pet Owners Who Visit and Like to Complain About Our Pets: 1. They live here. You don’t. 2. If you don’t want their hair on your clothes, stay off the furniture. 3. I like my pet a lot better than I like most people. 4. To you, it’s an animal. To me, he/she is an adopted son/daughter who is short, hairy, walks on all fours and doesn’t speak clearly. 5. Pets are better than kids. They eat less, don’t ask for money all the time, are easier to train, sometimes come when called, never drive your car, don’t hang out with drug-using friends, don’t smoke or drink, don’t worry about buying the latest fashions, don’t wear your clothes, don’t need a gazillion dollars for college, and if they get pregnant, you can sell the results.
By blablabla
February 17, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this
The stairway was not designed by NASCAR and is not a racetrack. Beating me to the bottom is not the objective.
this is so appropriate for one of my dogs. he’ll run you over trying to get to the top or bottom before you.
By Boscoe
February 17, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this
It’s pure folly to debate historical events with someone who, as I remember, once defended the Inquisition as an absolutely reasonable weapon in the battle against heresy, and denied that violence of any sort took place during said Inquisition. You see this is the problem with debating an idiot…they drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. John, just to follow your thought process here, what proves the inquisition actually happened. Now I’m not here to debate whether or not it did just what PROVES it did beyond what a high school text says. High school texts, vary anyway depending on who published them. What proves it did?
By Renee
February 17, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this
Hilarious!!!!!!! keep em comin’
By lozen
February 17, 2006 11:06 AM | Link to this
The Washington Post’s Style Invitational once again asked readers to take any word from the dictionary, alter it by adding, subtracting, or changing one letter, and supply a new definition. Here are this year’s winners:
Bozone (n.): The substance surrounding stupid people that stops bright ideas from penetrating. The bozone layer, unfortunately, shows little sign of breaking down in the near future. (Just for you Boscoe)
Foreploy (v): Any misrepresentation about yourself for the purpose of getting laid.
Cashtration (n.): The act of buying a house, which renders the subject financially impotent for an indefinite period.
Giraffiti (n): Vandalism spray-painted very, very high
Sarchasm (n): The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn’t get it.
Inoculatte (v): To take coffee intravenously when you are running late.
Hipatitis (n): Terminal coolness
Osteopornosis (n): A degenerate disease. (This one got extra credit.)
Karmageddon (n): It’s like, when everybody is sending off all these really bad vibes, right? And then, like, the Earth explodes and it’s like, a serious bummer.
Decafalon (n.): The grueling event of getting through the day consuming only things that are good for you.
Glibido (v): All talk and no action.
Dopeler effect (n): The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.
Arachnoleptic fit (n.): The frantic dance performed just after you’ve accidentally walked through a spider web.
Beelzebug (n.): Satan in the form of a mosquito that gets into your bedroom at three in the morning and cannot be cast out.
Caterpallor (n.): The color you turn after finding half a grub in the fruit you’re eating.
And the pick of the literature: Ignoranus (n): A person who’s both stupid and an a-s-s-hole (Just for you Randy)
By The72John
February 17, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this
Boscoe, perhaps your education stopped at high school, but mine didn’t.
I’m curious, are you being deliberately obtuse, or are you really as stupid as you sound?
You understand that history as it’s actually studied by historians involves the study of original source material, and not “high school textbooks”?
By Jack
February 17, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this
Yes but pets don’t grow to be indepenent on the human “Mom” Mom will forever have to be there or put pet up in high priced, unsanitary kennels so that she can also have a life.
By blablabla
February 17, 2006 11:10 AM | Link to this
You understand that history as it’s actually studied by historians involves the study of original source material, and not “high school textbooks�?
i actually wondered who wrote the high school textbooks since the historians are simply the guys who read all of them.
By Renee
February 17, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this
My dog feels like she must join me in the bathroom! Even wanting to jump on me while I’m using it. I don’t bother her when she uses it!
By The72John
February 17, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this
Boscoe is trying to create a fallacious link between faith and history. He is attempting to suggest that because we did not actually witness history that it is no more certain than his “faith”. It is a poor attempt at sophistry, but I expect nothing more than poor attempts from him. Who knew that post-modernism had seeped into the schools of Catholic “thought”.
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this
SarChasm is a good one. LOL
on that graffiti thought, did y’all read that some of those ancient cave-drawings are probably teen-age graffiti, complete with big boobs and all that. some things never change.
By Julie
February 17, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this
Muslims need to die. They are an angry people, wanting to kill all that don’t believe in their beliefs. There is no respect for other religions, although they expect us to respect their religion. You cannot reason with the unreasonable. Extinction is the only answer.
By Boscoe
February 17, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this
I’m not trying to create anything John, you wanted to respond to a comment I made to someone else. You had to stick your fat head into it. And as usual you avoid the question. Yes, I understand about high school text books John, if you could read you would see I isolated them when I asked the question in the first place. So quit jerking around and show me how smart you are…. answer the question. What proves the inquisition exists?
By RF
February 17, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this
Julie- gee, kinda sounds like most southern baptists I know….
The muslims probably say the same things about us. Difference is, and it’s scary, they’re willing to live up to their words and actually practice what they preach.
By Julie
February 17, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this
RF: That’s what I’m saying. We need to act! LOL
By Sage
February 17, 2006 11:33 AM | Link to this
What proves the inquisition exists?
Sages told verbally down through the ages, HighPriest to HighPriest’s son.
By The72John
February 17, 2006 11:33 AM | Link to this
Yes, it’s always good to lump an entire religion together based on the actions of a radical few.
If you are a Christian, then you must be an abortion doctor-murdering gay bar-bombing terrorist, I suppose?
Woops - only solution for you is extinction!
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this
Boy, Julie, you’re so smart. I can’t believe you figured that out all by yourself!
By The72John
February 17, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this
Boscoe, you are a moron…
Original source documents, idiot. Documents written BY the inquistion, by VICTIMS of the inquisition, by members of your very own sad, pathetic CHURCH.
What a complete IDIOT you are.
By Boscoe
February 17, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this
Sorry sage, but to believe that would require faith in the source,something much along the lines of religion, and if you have faith in anything you must be mentaly impaired….Just ask John or Brian, they’ll tell you.
By God
February 17, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this
BOSCOE! BE QUIET! YOU’RE GIVING ME A BAD NAME!
By Boscoe
February 17, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this
Original source documents, idiot. Documents written BY the inquistion, by VICTIMS of the inquisition, by members of your very own sad, pathetic CHURCH Well John, doesn’t the Church have source documents to prove it’s existance as well? The Pope is teaching from history then it seems. Is the teaching of valid history mindless John?
By The72John
February 17, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this
Sorry sage, but to believe that would require faith in the source,something much along the lines of religion, and if you have faith in anything you must be mentaly impaired….Just ask John or Brian, they’ll tell you.
This is exactly what I said he was driving at, that Boscoe denied. He is trying to suggest that “faith” in superstition and mythology is the same as relying on the veracity of historical documents. Any educated person understands that this is false, but Boscoe still tries to suggest otherwise.
By Boscoe
February 17, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this
Your post couldn’t have come at a better time John. Thanks for posting. Keep up the good work. Dork.
By Mara
February 17, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this
Renee, at least you only have to deal with one animal! I’ve got 3 cats who emphatically believe that if they can…juuust…reach a ….little…farther……under the door…
By The72John
February 17, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this
Ohhh, Boscoe called me a Dork!
Actually, I was thinking that YOUR post couldn’t come at a better time. You confirmed the parallel I was trying to draw perfectly.
I don’t really remember denying the existance of your church…another good attempt to obfuscate the argument, credulous fool.
By lozen
February 17, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this
Hey Jack, lots of kids don’t ever become independent of mom and dad either! I know some parents who wish there was a nice clean kennel to put the kids in.
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this
Mara, it’s funny you should mention that. I just told Renee last night how my cat was reaching under the door trying her darnedest to get in! LOL.
(Oh, and Renee has a cat and a dog).
By Billy
February 17, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this
Boscoe, can you prove it didn’t happen? No? Is there evidence to indicate it didn’t happen? No? Then shut up.
By Renee
February 17, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this
LOL Mara….
Actually JBM I have two cats and a dog…never mind…bad joke LOL
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this
Ewwww, Renee!!!!!! ~~smacking the back of your hand~~
By RF
February 17, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this
Renee- you’re right—bad joke!! but I laughed anyway!!
By lozen
February 17, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this
Boscoe here it is again so you can possibly read it this time. Did you even realize this man is talking about people like you? “Modern day religion emphasizes correct beliefs at the expense of a rich experiential life,â€? Strenski observes, and unfortunately for us, religious literalists only seem to observe arcane details.”
By The72John
February 17, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this
He doesn’t have to prove anything - he has…faith! That’s the beauty part. He can win any argument (in his own mind) by simply playing the faith card. Forget hard evidence - as far as he’s concerned faith is all that’s required.
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this
Why are people shutting the doors on cats anyhow? How abusive(j/k). Good way to get the carpet ripped up. LOL (or the closed door sprayed…”pSSSSSS, I’ll mark this door real well”)
By Jack
February 17, 2006 12:00 PM | Link to this
Some parents are smart and save through their growing years so they can send them off to the 4 year kennels.
By Boscoe
February 17, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this
John exactly what “faithâ€? in superstition and mythology were you referring to then?
By peepers
February 17, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
Only a Southerner knows the difference between a hissie fit and a coniption fit, and that you don’t “HAVE” them, you “PITCH” them. Only a Southerner knows how many fish, collard greens, turnip greens, peas, beans, etc., make up “a mess.” Only a Southerner can show or point out to you the general direction of “yonder.” Only a Southerner knows exactly how long “directly” is — as in: “Going to town, be back directly.” Even Southern babies know that “Gimme some sugar” is not a request for the white, granular sweet substance that sits in a pretty little bowl in the middle of the table. All Southerners know exactly when “by and by” is. They might not use the term, but they know the concept well. Only a Southerner knows instinctively that the best gesture of solace for a neighbor who’s got trouble is a plate of hot fried chicken and a big bowl of cold potato salad. If the neighbor’s trouble is a real crisis, they also know to add a large banana puddin! Only Southerners grow up knowing the difference between “right near” and “a right far piece.” They also know that “just down the road” can be 1 mile or 20. Only a Southerner, both knows and understands, the difference between a redneck, a good ol’ boy, and po’ white trash. No true Southerner would ever assume that the car with the flashing turn signal is actually going to make a turn. A Southerner knows that “fixin” can be used as a noun, a verb, or an adverb. Only Southerners make friends while standing in lines. We don’t do “queues,” we do “lines”; and when we’re “in line,” we talk to everybody! Put 100 Southerners in a room and half of them will discover they’re related, even if only by marriage. Southerners never refer to one person as “ya’ll.” Southerners know grits come from corn and how to eat them. Every Southerner knows tomatoes with eggs, bacon, grits, and coffee are perfectly wonderful; that red eye gravy is also a breakfast food; and that fried green tomatoes are not a breakfast food. When you hear someone say, “Well, I caught myself lookin’,” you know you are in the presence of a genuine Southerner! Only true Southerners say “sweet tea” and “sweet milk.” Sweet tea indicates the need for sugar and lots of it — we do not like our tea unsweetened. “Sweet milk” means you don’t want buttermilk. And a true Southerner knows you don’t scream obscenities at little old ladies who drive 30 MPH on the freeway. You just say, “Bless her heart” and go your own way. To those of you who’re still a little embarrassed by your Southerness: Take two tent revivals and a dose of sausage gravy and call me in the morning. Bless your heart! And to those of you who are still having a hard time understanding all this Southern stuff, bless your hearts, I hear they are fixin’ to have classes on Southernness as a second language! And for those that are not from the South but have lived here for a long time, ya’ll need a sign to hang on ya’lls front porch that reads “I aint from the South but I got here as fast as I could.” Bless your hearts, ya’ll have a blessed day.
By Boscoe
February 17, 2006 12:10 PM | Link to this
Billy I never said it didn’t. Before you go off half cocked read the posts. I wasn’t debating whether the inquisition is real. Lozen, when someone makes the choice become part of a religion they ARE going to have to give up a few habits. Is that a bad thing?
By Jack
February 17, 2006 12:13 PM | Link to this
Boscoe is slowwwwwwwly reeling John in. Cut the line before its too late!
By Jack
February 17, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this
Geepers Peepers that was a good post.
By Boscoe
February 17, 2006 12:16 PM | Link to this
He doesn’t have to prove anything - he has…faith! That’s the beauty part. He can win any argument (in his own mind) by simply playing the faith card. Forget hard evidence - as far as he’s concerned faith is all that’s required. Again John you aviod the subject when pressed. There’s hard evidence to suggest both are historical in the form of writtings and paintings John. So your point is John?
By Billy
February 17, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this
Boscoe, I only go off fully cocked.
If you’re not debating the existence of the inquisition then what the hell is your point? That it takes faith to believe something in history happened? Fine. Call it faith, but it’s a different kind of faith. It’s faith in the historical process. It’s faith in multiple references. It’s faith in the way historians will say, “Not much is known about [insert thing here], but what we do know is this…” It isn’t blind faith. Only the most idiotic f*** has trouble discerning that “faith” from blind religious faith based on the contradictory ramblings of superstitious people 2000+ years ago when people, as David Cross says, “…were even dumber than we are today,”
By peepers
February 17, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this
I have an older cat who isn’t very good at cleaning up after he uses the bathroom. He tries to cover it but he just never has gotten it right for some reason. So the younger one waits until he leaves and then jumps right in and covers it up for him. It’s a reciprocal agreement they have going on. After the young one goes, the older one cleans his bottom just like a mother cat with a kitten.
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 12:25 PM | Link to this
LOL@ jeepers peepers. That was funny, Jack.
And, Peepers, our oldest two cats are sisters, and one of them is mentally disturbed. When we first got them as kittens, the sane one would never clean up after using the litterbox. The disturbed one would always go in and cover her “mess” and then come out of the box and lick her sister clean.
It was so cute.
Now, they pretty much ignore each other. LOL.
By Boscoe
February 17, 2006 12:25 PM | Link to this
Billy are you in anyway related to John? Just wondering. Billy both the Church and let’s just use the Inquisition here since it has already been brought up, have writings and paintings that are links to their respective histories. Why is one valid and one not when you have seen neither?
By RF
February 17, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this
You could be like my mom who gets tired of cleaning up after the animals and puts them out (which usually means they come to my house). She put dad out once and it took three years to get him back in!! LOLOL
By Billy
February 17, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this
I’m a little unclear on your question. The Church was the perpetrator of the Inquisition. What exactly are you asking me about?
By lozen
February 17, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this
Peepers, my two male cats have exactly the same routine. Are yours jealous of each other? Mine are so jealous when I pet one the other sits there glaring at us. My older cat weighs about 10 lbs, the younger one about 14, he’s grown into a real brute. Fortunately for the small guy, junior doesn’t know how big he’s gotten, so the little one still rules.
By Mara
February 17, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this
It is reported that the following edition of the Book of Genesis was discovered in the Dead Seal Scrolls. If authentic, it would shed light on the question, “Where do pets come from?”
And Adam said, “Lord, when I was in the garden, you walked with me everyday. Now I do not see you anymore. I am lonesome here and it is difficult for me to remember how much you love me.”
And God said, “No problem! I will create a companion for you that will bewith you forever and who will be a reflection of my love for you, so that you will know I love you, even when you cannot see me. Regardless of how selfish and childish and unlovable you may be, this new companion will accept you as you are and will love you as I do, in spite of yourself.”
And God created a new animal to be a companion for Adam. And it was a good animal. And God was pleased.
And the new animal was pleased to be with Adam and he wagged his tail. And Adam said, “But Lord, I have already named all the animals in the Kingdom and all the good names are taken and I cannot think of a name for this new animal.”
And God said, “No problem! Because I have created this new animal to be a reflection of my love for you, his name will be a reflection of my own name, and you will call him DOG.”
And Dog lived with Adam and was a companion to him and loved him. And Adam was comforted. And God was pleased. And Dog was content and wagged his tail.
After a while, it came to pass that Adam’s guardian angel came to the Lord and said, “Lord, Adam has become filled with pride. He struts and preens like a peacock and he believes he is worthy of adoration. Dog has indeed taught him that he is loved, but no one has taught him humility.”
And the Lord said, “No problem! I will create for him a companion who will be with him forever and who will see him as he is. The companion will remind him of his limitations, so he will know that he is not worthy of adoration.”
And God created CAT to be a companion to Adam. And Cat would not obey Adam.
And when Adam gazed into Cat’s eyes, he was reminded that he was not the supreme being. And Adam learned humility.
And God was pleased. And Adam was greatly improved. And Dog wagged his tail.
And Cat did not care one way or the other.
By lozen
February 17, 2006 12:34 PM | Link to this
JBM, pets can save us from being so serious about ourselves can’t they? I wish I could find the sheet about humans acting like dogs and sniffing each others bottoms. It was so funny. Anyway, Mark Twain said, “If we mixed cat and man, it would improve the man immeasurably but ruin the cat.”
By lozen
February 17, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this
Mara, I love that! Have to send it to everybody I know.
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this
And Cat did not care one way or the other
because the cat KNEW, and that was all that mattered. LMAO
By Lurker
February 17, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this
Boscoe, the reason one (the inquisition) can be considered valid, as you put it, and the other (religious writings and paintings) cannot is because the former deals with ideas are seen everyday. Things like violence, religious persicution, invasions, etc can be seen by watching any tv or reading a newspaper. It isnt difficult to understand that all of those things have been going on for centuries.
Religous historical documents, however, deal with events that most certianly cannot be seen today. When was the last time you saw someone rise from the dead? Turn water to wine? Walk on water? Create the universe?
By Boscoe
February 17, 2006 12:39 PM | Link to this
So your assertion Billy, is that the Inquisition is real but it was committed by believers of the contradictory ramblings of superstitious people 2000+ years ago? Billy your belief that the inquisition actually happened is only based on the writings of people from that time. You did not witness it yourself. How is the belief in religion less than that? How does belief in the writers of the inquisition make that any more valid?
By Jack
February 17, 2006 12:46 PM | Link to this
I’m kinda glad humans don’t greet each other as our four legged friends.
By The72John
February 17, 2006 12:46 PM | Link to this
The primary difference is that even the OLDEST surviving versions of the New Testament can not be considered original documents. Many Biblical scholars estimate that, at best, the earliest documents that can be identified as part of that collection come from the second or third centuries. Many scholars can’t even agree that the writers to whom they are attributed are actually the people who wrote them.
On the other hand, the closer we get to the modern era, the more actual original source material exists. And why in the world would you think that a good historian wouldn’t consider the writings and documents of the Church in their findings?
By Sage
February 17, 2006 12:47 PM | Link to this
don’t forget Ezekiel being spirited away by UFOs.
By RF
February 17, 2006 12:48 PM | Link to this
I’m just glad I don’t have to go around every day and mark my territory.
The Cat knows all and will NEVER tell a soul!
By Jack
February 17, 2006 12:49 PM | Link to this
Dogs have owners, cats have staff.
By Boscoe
February 17, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this
When was the last time you saw someone rise from the dead? Turn water to wine? Walk on water? Create the universe?* Lurker** you make a very good point. Someone can make a connection based on what they are witnessing today, I agree. The catch is that the violence has a prominent spot on the nightly news every night. Would you recognize a “miracle” if it happened? Who says a miracle must be a spectacular event? People die on the operating table and are resuscitated time and again. People who were thought to have terminal cancer have had the cancer vanish without, or with very little, medical assistance. These things have been recorded. These things don’t necessarily prove the existence of miracles but it doesn’t discount them either.
By lozen
February 17, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this
72John, keep thinking to yourself, “Bozone.”
Bozone (n.): The substance surrounding stupid people that stops bright ideas from penetrating. The bozone layer, unfortunately, shows little sign of breaking down in the near future.
By Boscoe
February 17, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this
Lozen, you never answered my question on the Strenski quote. You’re not scared are you?
By Boscoe
February 17, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this
Well John, considering that the writtings from the Bible would be about 2000 years old and the Inquisition, as an example, somewhere in the neighborhood of 800 years, you would think it would be easier to track the history.
By FatMoose
February 17, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this
So your assertion Billy, is that the Inquisition is real but it was committed by believers of the contradictory ramblings of superstitious people 2000+ years ago? Billy your belief that the inquisition actually happened is only based on the writings of people from that time. You did not witness it yourself. How is the belief in religion less than that? How does belief in the writers of the inquisition make that any more valid?
And you wonder why we state that you (and others like you) cannot think for yourself or logically/critically????!?!??!
The fact that you need assistance with such a simple issue is absurd!
The simple difference that you are asking for bw the two situations? One has MULTIPLE reports of the same thing by people with DIFFERENT objectives/agendas but still read the same/simalar; where-as the other cannot be substantiated outside of the bible which is written by different people with the SAME objective/agenda and is not ever mentioned again in history except in reference TO the bible.
By Mara
February 17, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this
Jack loved that “cats have staff” (LOL) how true!
Lozen, I got about a hundred “cat” documents! ‘Cats “Rules to Live By”’ is one of the longest, but I excerpted this part cuz it’s the funniest. (and judging by how my cats act, the most widely obeyed…)
HAMPERING: If one of your humans is engaged in some activity and the other is idle, stay with the busy one. This is called “helping,” otherwise known as “hampering.” Following are the rules for “hampering:” When supervising cooking, sit just behind the left heel of the cook. You cannot be seen and thereby stand a better chance of being stepped on and then picked up and comforted. For book readers, get in close under the chin, between eyes and book, unless you can lie across the book itself. For paperwork, lie on the work in the most appropriate manner so as to obscure as much of the work as possible or at least. Pretend to doze, but every so often reach out and slap the pencil or pen. Bite when you’re moved on. When a human is holding the newspaper in front of him/her, be sure to jump on the back of the paper. Humans love to jump. MOST IMPORTANT When human is working at computer, jump up on desk, walk across keyboard and write a short story. Bat at mouse pointer on screen as if it were real. Then lay in human’s lap across arms, hampering typing in progress.
WALKING: As often as possible, dart quickly and as close as possible in front of the human, especially: on stairs, when they have something in their arms, in the dark, and when they first get up in the morning. This will help their co-ordination skills.
BEDTIME: Always sleep on the human at night so he/she cannot move around. Even better- lie on his or hers face, making sure your arse is right on their nose. When she is wearing an expensive silk nightie, don’t forget to paw it. This will create lovely patterns!
By Peepers
February 17, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this
Yes, my cats are terribly jealous of each other. I keep wondering if it’s because I have so little time to give them attention. I got the younger one so the older wouldn’t be alone so much. Sometimes I think it was a good thing but…. never realized how much messier two would be. This morning just before I left for work, running late already, the older one threw up and I had to clean it up which made me even later. If I had a $ for every time I go home and the shower curtain with rod and all (use that spring type) has been pulled down. They play this game where junior hides behind the shower curtain and pats it so senior will grab at him.
By Renee
February 17, 2006 01:05 PM | Link to this
Dogs have owners, cats have staff.
Too funny!!
By lozen
February 17, 2006 01:09 PM | Link to this
Yeah Mara, the darting as close as possible in front of your human! Then when I step on one of them, he scolds me like it’s my fault. I believe him of course and spend hours apologizing.
By Renee
February 17, 2006 01:12 PM | Link to this
Mara….that is soooo on point…lol, lol lol
By Mara
February 17, 2006 01:27 PM | Link to this
My husband jokes that our oldest is really a contract killer from the “cat mafia” who’s taken the job of causing my demise. He really likes that “sit just behind the left foot…” thing. Cooking dinner becomes a weird mix of yoga, ballet, and sheer dumb luck.
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 01:36 PM | Link to this
Peepers, I can top that one.
First of all, I’m always running late.
So, Tuesday morning, I open my closet door to grab a sweater only to find all (and I mean allllllllll) my clothes pulled off the hanger, piled up on the floor. And, somehow, the little rugrats climbed to the shelf on top and pulled all my sweaters down.
One good thing came out of it though. They snatched the guilt right out of getting their bad behinds declawed.
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 01:40 PM | Link to this
JBM - please please don’t declaw, that is their FIRST line of defense in ‘rough’ situations.
By Julia
February 17, 2006 01:42 PM | Link to this
Been having computer problems so I was delayed in responding earlier.
To “The72John�- I guess you can’t take a joke or don’t understand the concept of a joke.
So Christians are supposed to “lighten up” and learn to take a “J-O-K-E” and yet atheists are excempt from doing that?
It was a joke ok. I did not say atheists are morons. It was simply a joke. There have been Christian jokes, Southern jokes, blonde jokes, women jokes-all of those descriptions apply to me and yet I don’t get bent out of shape over JOKES.
Either way, you act very mean spirited.
By blablabla
February 17, 2006 01:43 PM | Link to this
yes, jbm. please don’t de-claw. i’m not at all a cat person, but the cat will be without one of its main defenses if it ever escaped/ran away.
By Bruce
February 17, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this
How do you catch a Polar Bear?
By Mara
February 17, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this
JBM I made the mistake of de-clawing our oldest. At the time I was under the misconception that they just pulled the little kitty nails out and the buggers wouldn’t grow back. I know now that it’s really an amputation of their digits, up to the first “knuckle”. I’ll never do it again. My Jocko has never walked the same since, and he became very timid about jumping from even medium heights. Just an FYI in case you were really serious
By Jack
February 17, 2006 01:54 PM | Link to this
You dig a hole in the ice and put in a can of peas. When the polar bear comes up and bends over to pick up the can of peas, you kick him in the ice-hole.
By Jack
February 17, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this
I like my cat roasted over low heat for 3 hours and served with a good wine sauce.
By The72John
February 17, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this
Julia, if you don’t want to be attacked back, don’t attack first, hmm? Your joke was insulting and you know it. Don’t pretend otherwise, claiming that I simply can’t take a joke. You know that if I had posted a joke with the positions reversed you would have had some indignant thing to say about how Christians are being - laugh - persecuted.
By RF
February 17, 2006 01:59 PM | Link to this
JBM- get a spray bottle of water. They hate that. That’s how I got mine to quit climbing the Christmas tree. They don’t even go near it anymore. Don’t declaw them—sometimes it causes nerve damage and pain. I close bedroom doors during the day to keep mine contained.
By Mara
February 17, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this
Julia, you may have laughed your a* off at your little “joke” but it certainly didn’t come across to most of us as a light-hearted poke at atheists. It came across as a mean-spirited jab. And the context of a teacher bringing up religion and causing confusion for the pupils…that’s why there are tons of people (even *christian people) who support the Church/State seperation.
By Angie
February 17, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this
Hi Boscoe! Long time no see. Don’t let this 72 guy drag you down to his level. He always fights dirty and uses foul language and derogatory remarks when he runs out of intelligent things to say. (Which doesn’t take but a few seconds.)
I disagree with you on the inquisition subject and a few more as you know but I think you’re doing a good job of making your case with these guys. You have to keep in mind that people who have it in their head ‘that there is no God and we can do anything we want because we’ll never have to answer to anyone’ just don’t understand FAITH.
They think it’s like believing in the tooth fairy or something. They don’t understand that God makes Himself known to you and that when you ASK Him to come into your life He will. They don’t understand spirituality so therefore they think anyone who DOES is a “moron”.
By Jack
February 17, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this
Julia’s joke was no more offensive as a Polack or Italian joke. Lighten up. Its Friday.
By Renee
February 17, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this
the water bottle does WONDERS!!!
By Eirik
February 17, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this
I have three cats (was four but I just lost one to kidney disease) and I have two dogs. Am I cat person or a dog person? By weight the dogs win, but by quantity the cats come up on top.
You can’t have anything nice though…but I wouldn’t want to be without them all.
And what is this fascination cats have with getting into small spaces?
By RF
February 17, 2006 02:12 PM | Link to this
Angie- don’t jump to conclusions. Most of the people questioning here are actually quite spiritual and many are born-again christians. Some just refuse to accept things because ‘the preacher says so’. I think most understand faith, but not blind, senseless faith.
Don’t jump into the fray. It can get ugly and the most christian have become the biggest mud-slingers. It ain’t pretty, and it really destroys the power of any witness you might be able to have.
By blogeditor
February 17, 2006 02:14 PM | Link to this
W@W: Inquisition aside, newbie Blog editor hasn’t laughed so much since last re-reading a Pogo book. TYVM.
By The72John
February 17, 2006 02:15 PM | Link to this
The problem, Angie, is that you are so tied up in what you think is spirituality that you lack the intellectual ability to understand anything more complex than Fiat Lux.
And I don’t get nasty because I’ve run out of intelligent things to say, I get nasty because fundy religious freaks deserve to have the kind of crap heaped upon them that they have heaped for centuries.
Your own bigotry is coming back to roost - hope you enjoy it!
By Renee
February 17, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this
*They don’t understand spirituality so therefore they think anyone who DOES is a “moron�. *
~talking to myself~ don’t bite, please don’t bite…
By Jack
February 17, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this
The water bottle works good but you have to make sure it is full or nearly full to get maximum force behind it when you hit the little fur ball for mis-behaving.
By Scalia
February 17, 2006 02:20 PM | Link to this
Angie girl, you are begging for trouble, honey.
By RF
February 17, 2006 02:21 PM | Link to this
a little spritz in the schnozz does the job perfectly. They HATE water in the face. My male cat only has to hear the bottle hiss and he runs like he just saw a ghost!!
By Mara
February 17, 2006 02:22 PM | Link to this
Jack, Super-soakers and water guns work well too. And you have to be sure that there’s nothing blocking the escape path, cuz those buggers totally freak out when they get wet! By this time all my honey and I need to do is shake the spray bottle in their general direction and “POW!!” off they go.
By Jack
February 17, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this
Wish I had invented the super-soaker.
By RF
February 17, 2006 02:25 PM | Link to this
Mara- do yours ever nip you when you’re trying to fix their food? I’ve been told those are love bites, but they’re just dang irritating!
By FatMoose
February 17, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this
Angie,
You have to keep in mind that people who have it in their head ‘that there is no God and we can do anything we want because we’ll never have to answer to anyone’ just don’t understand FAITH.
Hmmm - there are a lot of people on here that oppose his (and other caustic “christians”) notions who believe in christ and have faith.
It is inane how you all think in such a black/white manner - which is the “quality” you all exhibit which logical/realistic people (nothing to do with being christian) dislike so much.
Not so much the idea of jesus and HIS (vs YOUR) message.
By Angie
February 17, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this
I apologize for sounding like I was generalizing about the people on this blog. I was referring to a few particular people who were arguing with Boscoe and name calling/being rude. I wasn’t referring to everyone here obviously. I’m sorry if that’s the way it came across.
Surely you can make your point without calling one another names. Or can you?
By Jack
February 17, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this
Some can and some cannot.
By Jack K
February 17, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this
A husband was in big trouble when he forgot his wife’s birthday. But she was willing to let it pass if he made it up to her in the right way.
His wife told him “Tomorrow there better be something in the driveway for me that goes zero to 200 in 2 seconds flat”.
The next morning the wife found a small package in the driveway. She opened it and found a brand new bathroom scale…
By FatMoose
February 17, 2006 02:36 PM | Link to this
And what is this fascination cats have with getting into small spaces?
Caught my full grown cat trying to wedge himself into a cereal box the other day! Someof their notions of “fun” are quite odd.
FYI - I have: 2 cats 1 dog and 2 girl ferrets
The all get along good, but the little ferret girls nip the yellow labs feet to tease him. And he just looks at me like “Daddy, please let me out of here.” But he is gentle the whole time he is with them.
As for declawing cats: Besides just being cruel, they will often times become bad biters and kickers with their back claws (which are their REAL defences - and infectious).
By Jack
February 17, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this
Hey Jack K., when is his funeral?
By Julia
February 17, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this
If this offends any pirates I apologize in advance…;)
One day a Pirate and a bartender were talking to each other in a bar. The Bartender asked the pirate “Where did ya get that peg leg from?”
The Pirate responded “We were sailing the seas when a big ol’ shark came up to me while I was swimmin’ and bit off me leg.”
Later the Bartender asked “Where did you get that hook then?”
The pirate responded “Well, me crew and I were in a battle and it got cut through the bone.”
The bartender then asked “Then where did ya get the eye patch from?”
The pirate said “In a harbor I looked at a gull flying over head and it took a dump right in me eye.”
The bartender was puzzled and asked the pirate, “How would that make you get an eye patch?”
The pirate responded, “First day with the hook.”
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this
RF - cats communicate with those small bites and it sometimes is ‘affectionate’. watch two cats groom each other, they will often add bites in. One of mine when she is feeling especially playful, will nip. And she is not being hostile, she has a whole other ‘tude for that. LOL
in the case you mentioned, (food), you are probably getting the ‘speed it up, dude’ message.
By lozen
February 17, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this
Oh Angie, it’s much more fun to call people names like Bozone, esp. when it’s so close to Boscoe and describes him so perfectly. I’ve notice our little “ignoranus” isn’t here so much today.
By Mara
February 17, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this
Not anymore. Slink, the youngest, was a rescue cat when we got him. Emaciated, sickly, and flea ridden. I don’t think that he’d ever been hand fed and I think he was just so happy to have love/food/shelter that he “nibbled” (and drooled…) What we did was “treat” him with kitty yum-yums. When he’d nip, we’d tap his nose then offer another treat. If he didn’t nip, he got the treat. We took it very slowly and gently though. We didn’t want to have him start associating being held, or being treated, with being diciplined. Even so, it didn’t take too long. Maybe a couple weeks of working with him a few minutes every day. Now he just tries to grab kibble from the food bin every time we open it. Both of our other cats were pretty much hand raised so we never had any real behavioral problems with them.
By Jack K
February 17, 2006 02:41 PM | Link to this
Heck, if a joke about a Catholic church p-i-s-s-e-s you off then PLEASE don’t read it ok.
A drunken man staggered into a Catholic church, sat down in the Confessional and said nothing. The priest is waiting and waiting and waiting.
The priest coughs to attract the drunk man’s attention, but still the man says nothing.
The priest then knocks on the wall three times in a final attempt to get the man to speak.
Finally the drunk replies, “No use knockin,’ pal. There’s no paper.”
By The72John
February 17, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this
I’ll make a deal with you, Angie.
When the fundies who rear their ugly heads from time to time on this blog can make an argument without doing ANY of the following, I’ll swear off insults, at least until they re-offend.
A) Make statements like “I know God. You don’t understand because you don’t.” These statements suggest that you are somehow spiritually superior to everyone who doesn’t believe exactly like you do.
B) Begin your conversations with “You are going to hell”. This is self-explanatory.
C) Gay bash. I realize it’s really hard for you people not to do this one, but I just know you can do it.
D) Tell everyone else how sinful they are, and that while you are also sinful, in the words of Church Lady, you’re just a teeny weeny little bit superior to them.
E) Gay bash. I mention this one twice because it’s what y’all always jump to. You’re obsessed, seriously.
Now, if y’all can do any one of these things, I’ll stop calling you names, mmmkay?
I give it ten minutes.
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 02:50 PM | Link to this
The only problem with the water bottle is that you have to catch them in the act. It wouldn’t have been effective in that situation. I do use it to keep them off my furniture and Christmas tree or from tearing up my blinds or bothering the turtles.
Also, there have been many advancements in the declawing procedure - now they have laser treatment and it’s much less painful. And, has a much shorter recovery time.
And one other thing… one of my cats is very hostile toward another one. He uses those claws to attack both my other cats, and sometimes he and the dog play too harshly and she gets all scratched up. Seems just as cruel to let him keep those claws and harass the other kids all day long.
By Mara
February 17, 2006 02:50 PM | Link to this
John, 10 whole minutes!? And I agree with you that sometimes expressions of “faith” comes off as arrogant superiority.
By Bruce
February 17, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this
Three Little Pigs went out to dinner one night. The waiter came and took their drink order.
“I would like a Sprite,” said the first little piggy.
“I would like a Coke,” said the second little piggy.
“I want beer, lots and lots of beer,” said the third little piggy.
The drinks were brought out and the waiter took their orders for dinner.
“I want a nice big bowl of oatmeal,” said the first piggy.
“I would like the salad plate,” said the second piggy.
“I want beer, lots and lots of beer,” said the third little piggy.
The meals were brought out and a while later the waiter approached the table and asked if the piggies would like any dessert.
“I want a banana split,” said the first piggy.
“I want a root beer float,” said the second piggy.
“I want beer, lots and lots of beer,” exclaimed the third little piggy.
“Pardon me for asking,” said the waiter to the third little piggy, “but why have you only ordered beer all evening?”
You’re gonna LOVE this….
The third piggy says -
“Well, somebody has to go ‘Wee, wee, wee, all the way home!”
By Jack K
February 17, 2006 02:52 PM | Link to this
Expressions of disbelief also comes off that way. :(
By Mara
February 17, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this
Well, here it is Friday at QUITTIN’ TIME!! Yahoooo! Catch y’all on Monday. Have fun, but not tooo much fun! :^)
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this
LOL @ “mmmkay” reminds me of the school counselor on South Park… what’s his name again?
By The72John
February 17, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this
Hey, Jack K. As long as the “joke” isn’t a thinly veiled “if you aren’t a christian you’re a moron” “joke”, then we’ve got no problems with it.
See, here’s the distinction that you fundy types just can’t seem to grasp. I chalk it up to inbreeding, really…
It’s not the fact that you’re a Christian that p-i-s-s-e-s people off. It’s the fact that you’re self righteous, judgemental jerks who spend far more time condemning thy neighbor than anything else.
Once you learn to deal with this basic fact, I have no doubt you’ll be a better person. See - I have no problem with 95% of the people on this blog, almost all of whom are Christians. I have a problem with YOU fundy types.
So quit acting persecuted and start waking up to the fact that if you weren’t a total dick to people you wouldn’t have a problem.
By Jack K
February 17, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this
This is REALLY going to offend someone….
There once was an atheist girl from Nantucket,
(No, better not tell that one.)
By Jack
February 17, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this
Any cat worth his salt harasses turtles at every opportunity.
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
I once got my Mom to pull over once when I was about 11, traveling in the car, I kept saying I had to go “wee”. Once she pulled over, I got out, put my hands in the air, and said “Wee, Wee”. kinda thing that only works ONCE. LOL
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
Mr. Mackey
By Jack K
February 17, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this
First of all,I didn’t know that 72John spoke for the whole blog…mmmmkay.
Second of all, I don’t remember p-i-s-s-i-n-g in your Wheaties this morning so back off or take a pill.
By Jack
February 17, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this
Isn’t that a dick calling a dick a dick?
By The72John
February 17, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this
That would be Counselor Mackey, JBM :-)
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this
I can’t believe they let “dick” through… wow.
By RF
February 17, 2006 03:02 PM | Link to this
JBM- the back claws do the damage. And a cat with a superiority complex isn’t going to let silly claws keep him from being dominant! LOL
Think about clippers. I have a friend who does that to her cantankerous one and it helps. She clips them once a week or so and he hasn’t been nearly as destructive.
I didn’t know about the laser stuff. Wow—you never know what they’re going to do next!
By The72John
February 17, 2006 03:02 PM | Link to this
I’m only a dick when they’re a dick first…and you only have to “p** in my wheaties” once, Jack K. You showed your true colors a while back, so pardon me if I tell you to screw off, mmmkay?
By Jack
February 17, 2006 03:02 PM | Link to this
See Dick run. Run Dick run.
By lozen
February 17, 2006 03:04 PM | Link to this
Ah, come on. I want to hear the one about the atheist from nantucket…..
By RF
February 17, 2006 03:04 PM | Link to this
Cat could be man’s best friend, but he’d never stoop to admit it!!
Chilao- reminds me of the time this guy flew past us on the highway. My mom politely said to the window, “Race on catsh*%, somebody will cover you up”.
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 03:06 PM | Link to this
yea, me too, on the Nantucket joke, does sleigh ride come in?
LOL @ RF’s Mom.
By Jack K
February 17, 2006 03:06 PM | Link to this
72-Knock yourself out (literally) because your comments…I mean insults don’t make a hill of beans to me buddy. ‘kay
By Bruce
February 17, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this
Two men are driving through Texas when they get pulled over by a state trooper. The trooper walks up and taps on the window with his nightstick, the driver rolls down the window and “WHACK,” the trooper smacks him in the head with the stick.
The driver says, “What was that for?”
The trooper says, “You’re in Texas, son. When we pull you over, you better have your license ready when we get to your car.”
The driver says, “I’m sorry, officer, I’m not from around here.”
The trooper runs a check on the guy’s license, and he’s clean. He gives the guy his license back and walks around to the passenger side and taps on the window. The passenger rolls his window down, and “WHACK,” the trooper smacks him with the nightstick, too.
The passenger says, “What did you do that for?”
The trooper says, “Just making your wish come true.”
The passenger says, “Huh?”
The trooper says, “I know that two miles down the road you’re gonna say, ‘I wish that jerk would’ve tried that with me.’”
By Jack
February 17, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this
J. Giles?
By The72John
February 17, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this
Then why do you bother to yap about them, Jack K? And thanks, I don’t need to knock myself out - that’s what you fundies are for. Got to bang those bibles on someone or they won’t do you any good, will they, a-s-s?
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
Mountain, West Bruce and Lang.
By Jack K
February 17, 2006 03:12 PM | Link to this
Hey 72-do you ever get tired of wearing that red nose and size 22 floppy shoes?
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 03:12 PM | Link to this
took me a minute, I was thinking more along the lines of Moby Dick. technically Mountain, but I saw W,B,L do it as well, Leslie West.
I wonder if there will be a new subject everyday now, or W-to-W just getting a jump on the weekend.
By Jack
February 17, 2006 03:13 PM | Link to this
Mountain. Thats right. I can picture the eight-track now!
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this
LOL @ Eight-tracks. Yeah, I remember them.
By Jack
February 17, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this
Have a good weekend everyone! Watch where you go and don’t you eat that yellow snow!
By lozen
February 17, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this
JBM, it’s the linens in the closet with my cats. Hairs all over the sheets, duvets, blankets. With one mostly white and the other gray, they can mess up the lights and the darks both just great. And young guy likes to pull them off the shelf too. The clippers don’t work with all of them though. I can clip my older cat’s claws and he doesn’t mind at all; he likes the attention. The young one screams like I’m gonna kill him when i go near him with the nail clippers. My neighbor has her cat put to sleep every time she gets his nails clipped….gets pretty expensive.
By Jack K
February 17, 2006 03:22 PM | Link to this
Have a good weekend everyone…including 72. I was just joking around…lighten up just a little bit. Adios muchachos….hmmm, some nachos sound pretty good. ;)
Maybe next Friday john can come up with some jokes for US instead of the usual ‘everybody but me is a moron’ routine. Nah, what am I sayin’? ;P
By RF
February 17, 2006 03:23 PM | Link to this
lozen- that’s like mine with the comb. My male LOVES it and purrs so loud he sounds like a VW Beetle in high gear. My female, on the other hand, will lay there while I hold her with absolute fear on her face, and then she runs for cover and pouts for hours!
By FatMoose
February 17, 2006 03:23 PM | Link to this
There are nail covers too (think lee press-on) that renders them harmless.
Nail removal is just mean - find another way.
By The72John
February 17, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this
Hmm…people I don’t think are morons…
Jack Renee lozen Netbanker JBM RF Scalia Blablabla Chilao…
I’m sure I’ve left people off.
Actually, the list of people I think ARE morons is significantly shorter than the list of people who aren’t, and whose opinions and beliefs I respect.
Sorry.
By RF
February 17, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this
Well—I’m outa here for the weekend. Hold the fort down next week guys—I’ll be enjoying a little break!!!
By The72John
February 17, 2006 03:51 PM | Link to this
Not to keep harping on this, really, but I just glanced over at the “old” topic which is still open for commenting, and found this gem from Chuck…I almost hurt myself laughing.
Chuck says “I don’t have a single bigoted bone in my body”.
I think I cracked a rib.
By DLS
February 17, 2006 03:51 PM | Link to this
What proves the inquisition exists? It must Mel Brooks did a satire on it in History of the World Part I
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 04:02 PM | Link to this
Hey John, I looked at it earlier. Surely that wasn’t the only one of Chuck’s comments from today that you found hilarious… He really made an —- of himself.
By lozen
February 17, 2006 04:27 PM | Link to this
Chuck? Chuck? Did Chuck say something today? JBM, are you saying Boscoe and Chuck are one and the same? Did I miss something? Bozone?
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this
lozen - this was some “today” posting on the previous topic earlier today, before this new topic posted.
see bottom of top link below.
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 04:33 PM | Link to this
‘there was’? - actually rewrote that sentence and did not correct it all, and really screwed up the grammer there. it happens. LOL
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 04:34 PM | Link to this
sometimes it shows the previous topics below but right now it does not. did a second ago. kinda cumbersome to drill over to it by backing up in url in above address line.
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 04:36 PM | Link to this
the date is ‘09’, may be able to just back up to ‘17’ and do ‘09’ or ‘9’. wipe out the ‘why_’ etc of course.
By Just Being Me
February 17, 2006 04:36 PM | Link to this
Chilao, you screwed up the spelling of grammar too, not that I noticed… LOL!
By lozen
February 17, 2006 04:39 PM | Link to this
Oh, okay. You’re right JBM, Chuck is pitiful. If he weren’t so frightened of going to hell, he’d be out cruising every men’s bar in town. I would not be surprised to hear he’s doing that anyway in a not too distant future. he is so obviously one of the ones desperately fighting an inner desire that he has to keep squashing and telling himself how sinful it is to be gay. He brings it up in every single post on here. Someday, like Saul, he’ll pass out and have a vision and then he’ll be trying to get together with all the beautiful men on this blog he’s been so nasty to. Betcha!
By Chilao
February 17, 2006 04:43 PM | Link to this
Grammar? thanks JBM
LMAO
that “not that I noticed crap:. yeah, yeah,
have a brother-in-law, teaches high school english, and everytime we speak poorly around him we correct ourselves, and look at him. his comment “Contrary to popular opinion, I am not always noticing people’s grammer” (there I go again)
he was writing on the board once, in class, and made a spelling error, the kids(pupils) jumped all over him. He just turned back to them and said “That’s why they won’t let me teach the smart kids” .
he’s a hoot. LOL
By Randy
February 20, 2006 09:22 AM | Link to this
A 15 year old boy died last week from my daughter’s high school in a car wreck. Some non-Christians would ask “how would a loving God let this happend?”. The answer is simple, let’s look at how this effected other people. First, 6 of his organs were given out to 5 people about to die, extending their lives. Second, at the church service, over 200 people raised their hands to accept Jesus as their lord and savior and another 25(ish) at the school did the same thing. These 225 people could effect thousands or tens of thousands of others in their lifetime, to accept Jesus. What the event did is make thousands of people(mainly teenagers)see that they are mortal, that life can and sometimes does end suddenly. My prayers go out to this great family and I’m sure that they see the positive influence this unhappy event brought about. If you look at life from an eternal point of view, if we live here 15 years or 115 years, life here is a brief moment in time. What’s important is the decisions(accepting Jesus as lord and savior) we make while here on earth and helping others.
By Randy
February 20, 2006 09:28 AM | Link to this
Also, by the way, the boy was Christian, he actually went to my church(you probably figured that out already, church service, DA). The parents wouldn’t press charges against the driver either, as they didn’t want to ruin his life also. What a great family.
By Jack
February 20, 2006 09:31 AM | Link to this
I agree with some of your post Randy. (the last part) The family will not see a positive to their loved ones death for a long time if at all.
By Randy
February 20, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this
Some may make the statement, well he(the student that died) only lead 225 people to the lord. Let’s look at that and the best example I have for how one person can influenced many others is my grandmother back in the 1920’s. My mother’s mother’s family didn’t go to church back in the early 1900’s. Every sunday the preacher would walk by my grandmother’s house on his way to church. He would ask her to come, for years and years she would say “No thanks” we are to busy. But, in a nice Christian way he kept asking. So one sunday, he ask her and she said “No” and he said “You sure are waiting a long time”. My grandmother at that point got under “CONVICTION”(that’s the same thing that happened to the teenagers this past week). Being under conviction, is where God is calling you to come to him, it’s happends to everybody at least once in their life and some people many times. However, if you don’t act on it fairly quickly, you forget about it fast(evil influence). Back to the situation with my grandmother, she got under conviction and to make a long story short, she lead her 7 children and husband to the lord. They in turn lead almost everyone in my family(hundreds of cousins, grandchildren, great-grandchildren etc) to accept Jesus as lord and savior. Right now, I think we have 2 cousins(they grew up in a disfuctional family)that haven’t see the light. So, this one lady, literally lead hundreds of people to the lord in her family alone and how many people have they influenced in their lifetime??? I am so thankful to this pastor back in the 1920’s that was presistent(Jesus is tenderly calling) and showed my grandmother the truth. God bless him.
By Lurker
February 20, 2006 09:47 AM | Link to this
Randy: I already know what your answer to this will be, but don’t you find it at least somewhat odd that hundreds of people would be praising the god that according to your argument just killed, or at very least allowed this teenager to be killed at his own funeral?
If a preacher asked for an alter call (or some equivalent)at a funeral, it is nothing more than manipulating emotional kids (and adults). Most of those kids don’t “love� Jesus, they just don’t want to die and go to hell.
The whole argument of “at least something good came out of it,� is a coping mechanism. It is a very important and useful one, but at the end of the day, that is all it is. It is a way to move on with life and not be paralyzed by the emotions that come with loss. And if you disagree with this, and truly believe that the outcome has been positive, would you be willing to sacrifice a member of your family so a few hundred people could be “saved� by accepting Jesus at a funeral?
BTW, I do agree with the last line of your post…well most of it…I am guessing you can figure out what I would have left out…
By Randy
February 20, 2006 09:48 AM | Link to this
Sometimes Christian families see the positive fairly fast, sometimes not. We can only pray for them. I wondered if anybody else was here today.
By Jack
February 20, 2006 09:55 AM | Link to this
The positive I see when a loved one dies is that they are in a better place.
By candide
February 20, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this
What Randy says makes sense in a different, secular way. We all must “accept God’s will” even if there is no God. What this means is that what happens happens. You have to accept it, sooner or later. It is hard but eventually you will accept it if you want to survive.
Believers call it God’s will, even though how a God would will something bad is never rationally explainable, despite thousands of years of theological nonsense.
Non-believers can call it fate or chance or whatever they will. They can even call it God’s will. You don’t have to believe in God to call it God’s will. Like the phrase Act of God.
But when Christians or other believers try to see a bright side in tragedy, they are absurd and offensive. Christianity is sado-masocistic, that is it’s worst feature. Therein lies its role as mental illness.
By candide
February 20, 2006 09:59 AM | Link to this
Jack: if being dead is being in a better place, why don’t you commit suicide right away, eh?
By Randy
February 20, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this
Lurker, To answer your questions. As far as God allowing this to happend. I watched the movie Bruce Almighty last night and it had several great lines. One was “You can’t mess with FREE WILL”. God deals with free will, if he didn’t we would all be “Robots” and that would defeat his purpose for us(why we are here on this earth). I was telling someone yesterday, that if everyone had a guarantee to live to be 85 years old, no one would go to heaven. We would all just say, no I’m going to do whatever I want to do until I get 84 and then I will accept Jesus as my lord and savior. Then we would get to 84 and either by senile or not believe we are going to die at 85. My experience is the more times we say no to God, the easier it gets(that’s why very few older people come to the lord, they are committeed the wrong way). So why would God let a 15 year old die, because it creats urgency and that our life here on earth is going to be irrevelant(except what we do for God while here and have a loving family) in the long run. If we look at eternity, we are here just a brief moment. God sees the big picture, we only see the picture from our point of view.
By Jack
February 20, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this
Don’t believe in that. Norm.
By candide
February 20, 2006 10:04 AM | Link to this
So God sees the big picture. What big picture? You are dreamin’ again, Randy.
By DrunkDriver
February 20, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this
It looks like I might be able to cause a whole bunch of conversions tonight after the bar. And to think the state took my license away for all my previous DUIs.
“Officer, God told me to drive drunk tonight. It causes conversions”.
By kimberly
February 20, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this
I think HE created us. I don’t think He’s listening anymore. I think He left us here to fend for ourselves. He gave us a human example of how we’re supposed to act. “Follow me,” said the example, meaning “Do what I do, you morons, and it’ll be okay.” But few people actually do that. Plenty do all sorts of OTHER things in His name, but not what He actually did while on Earth. Most of us are just screwing up everything: all the gifts, the resources, and the potential that He gave us. No wonder He’s walked away. He likely doesn’t WANT to listen anymore. Why should He? I know I don’t.
By Jack
February 20, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this
Good Afternoon Kim :)
By Mara
February 20, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this
Candide, why wouldn’t” “God” allow something bad to happen to one of his believers? After all, being an all-knowing, omnipotent being, he indifferently ensouls babies that he *knows he’ll be condemning to the burning pits of hell for all eternity. Sounds like all-encompassing fatherly love to me.
By The72John
February 20, 2006 01:41 PM | Link to this
Taking a moment from cleaning out my storage closet to pop in. Hi folks - hope you are enjoying your day off, assuming you’ve got one.
It’s not just non-Christians who ask the question “Why”, Randy, though I realize that you believe questioning to be an act of the devil.
C.S. Lewis says God allows tragedy to happen because it serves as a trumpet-call to waken us from our self-indulgent lives and make us see the suffering around us. By being aware, we may be moved to do something about it and become more worthy.
Notice the difference between “allowing” tragedy and “causing” tragedy. Randy’s story almost would have us believe that God struck the teen down so that a few others could receive organs and He could chalk up some more sycophantitc worshipers. One does wonder, of course, how many of those who “accepted Jesus Christ” were already devout followers? I suspect all - experiencing the grief of a family at the loss of their child would hardly result in an epiphanic moment.
Also notice that Lewis - one of the pre-eminent theological philosophers of the twentieth century, Randy - makes no claims that suffering is designed to bring people to Jesus, but rather to inspire more kindness towards others. The conservative, evangelical philosophy stresses obedience to God, the fear of punishment, and the need for strict rules. Lewis obviously favors the idea that obedience to “love thy neighbor” is more important that “accepting Jesus Christ as your personal savior”.
I really hate that phrase.
By Nobody
February 20, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this
Oh my name it is nothin’ My age it means less The country I come from Is called the Midwest I’s taught and brought up there The laws to abide And that land that I live in Has God on its side.
Oh the history books tell it They tell it so well The cavalries charged The Indians fell The cavalries charged The Indians died Oh the country was young With God on its side.
Oh the Spanish-American War had its day And the Civil War too Was soon laid away And the names of the heroes I’s made to memorize With guns in their hands And God on their side.
Oh the First World War, boys It closed out its fate The reason for fighting I never got straight But I learned to accept it Accept it with pride For you don’t count the dead When God’s on your side.
When the Second World War Came to an end We forgave the Germans And we were friends Though they murdered six million In the ovens they fried The Germans now too Have God on their side.
I’ve learned to hate Muslims All through my whole life If another war starts It’s them we must fight To hate them and kill them To run and to die And accept it all bravely With God on my side.
But now we got weapons Of the chemical dust If fire them we’re forced to Then fire them we must One push of the button And a shot the world wide And you never ask questions When God’s on your side.
In a many dark hour I’ve been thinkin’ about this That Jesus Christ Was betrayed by a kiss But I can’t think for you You’ll have to decide Whether Judas Iscariot Had God on his side.
So now as I’m leavin’ I’m weary as Hell The confusion I’m feelin’ Ain’t no tongue can tell The words fill my head And fall to the floor If God’s on our side He’ll stop the next war.
Copyright © 1963; renewed 1991 Special Rider Music
By Renee
February 20, 2006 01:58 PM | Link to this
John, your second paragraph is so profound.
By Zack
February 20, 2006 02:47 PM | Link to this
Islam is not a religion of peace. It’s a religion of staunch hatred and violence. These comments are politically incorrect, but I don’t care. I’m tired of political correctness influencing a slew of lies in an attempt not to offend perpetrators. As for September 11, the muslims who attacked us weren’t extremists. The only extremists in that religion are the ones who AREN’T violent.
As I said, my comments are politically incorrect, but they’re correct.
By Disgusted
February 20, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
Islam is not a religion of peace. It’s a religion of staunch hatred and violence. These comments are politically incorrect, but I don’t care. I’m tired of political correctness influencing a slew of lies in an attempt not to offend perpetrators. As for September 11, the muslims who attacked us weren’t extremists. The only extremists in that religion are the ones who AREN’T violent.
Spoken by one of the most vile, hate-filled human beings to ever pollute this blog with his present. How ironic.
By Disgusted
February 20, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this
presence
By candide
February 20, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
The awful characteristics of Islam are also part of Christianity and Judaism because they all share the same primitive semitic religion. For many reasons Christianity and Judaism have gotten sanitized over time — but not entirely. When threatened ultra-orthodox Jews and evangelical Christians have shown a proclivity to act as badly as Muslims. Will Islam ever moderate? Hard to say. I am not waiting for peaceful Muslim neighbors; I prefer to shoot first.
The only religion I know of that does not share intolerance, bigotry, violence, and murder is perhaps Buddhism. nd Buddhism shares with no other religion an essentially anti-religious ethic. In its classical form — not the popular Buddhism of China and Japan — it does not believe in God; it simply teaches how to avoid pain by avoiding desire. There can be bad behaved Buddhists but by and large they do not approach the evil of which Christians, Jews, and Muslims are capable.
By candide
February 20, 2006 03:12 PM | Link to this
Mara: Christians ascribe to God the evil impulses they harbor within themselves. If there were a God he would long since have destroyed Christians as slanderers of Himself.
By Van
February 20, 2006 03:17 PM | Link to this
As for why does God allow bad things to happen, go back to the old testament and read the book of Job. I actually believe God allows us to mess up or improve our lives.
On the topic of the week, based on past history, we know appeasment does not work and has never worked, and also based on recent history (past 30 years), we know we can expect this type of reaction.
BTW, where are the moderate voices of Islam, the ones I have heard are very few and usually a local leader, if they are out there why hasn’t the AJC published and highlighted them?
By candide
February 20, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this
Why is the only American politician who is sincerely evangelical Christian, Jimmy Carter, so strongly hated by all the self-proclaimed patriotic Christians in our midst?
I think I know the answer but would like to hear what y’all think.
By kimberly
February 20, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this
Candide, I have been asking that question of those folks for years. I think I know as well, but won’t claim to know their hearts.
By Renee
February 20, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this
Islam is not a violent religion. Of coure there are violent extremists, as there are violent extremist Christians who kill in the name of God.
By Van
February 20, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this
candide,
Because some people can see and listen.
A so-so President, he was a good spokesperson for Habitat for Humanity, Not much of a ex-President. My opinions.
His mother Lillian said Billy was the smarter of the two.
By RF
February 20, 2006 03:30 PM | Link to this
Taking a moment from the mountain of laundry and errands today. Randy, here’s a companion story for you.
Last week, around the time your young man died, a 16yr. old in Dekalb county also died. His family was living in a motel, he was poor, he was black, and he was playing with a handgun he didn’t think was loaded. His death was labeled accidental. Except for a spot on the evening news, his story wasn’t told. I find it ironic that this poor young man, whose death was also accidental, didn’t get a picture in the paper, there was no large memorial service, and no news of how his family and friends were affected. What’s sad is that while his death was just as tragic, his story doesn’t matter as much as that of a well liked middle class white child. I’m by no means trying to demean the awesome witness the boy you refer to provided, but why do you think God was so glorified by one death and not the other? Why was there such public outpouring of sympathy for one and not the other? Somemday I want to ask God about that. Why is one family grieving in poverty and silence while another receives monumental support? Poverty affects people completely. They become nameless and nonexistent, even in death. What a shame…
By The72John
February 20, 2006 03:39 PM | Link to this
I’m just curious, Van, what DOES qualify as a good ex-President to you? Carter, unlike his speech-giving, money-grasping fellow ex-Presidents has dedicated his existence to furthering the cause of global peace and Democracy.
While Bush Sr. and Clinton go around raking in the big bucks on the lecture circuit, Jimmy Carter has spent years traveling around the Third World, acting as diplomat, negotiating peace treaties, assisting nations around the world in setting up legitimate, free elections. And on what little free time is left over from that endeavor, he builds houses for poor people with his own bare hands.
The man has dedicated his life to making the world a better place, and done it with such little regard for self-agrandizement that people like you feel perfectly comfortable calling him “not much of an ex-president”.
While he may not have been a great president, he has done more for the world after leaving office than most people ever dream of, and neither you nor I is remotely qualified to criticize his actions.
Just my opinion.
By kimberly
February 20, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this
Thank you to those who, in just a few short posts, totally validated what I expressed 11:32 this morning.
By Renee
February 20, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this
Very sad RF
By Jack
February 20, 2006 03:43 PM | Link to this
“BTW, where are the moderate voices of Islam, the ones I have heard are very few and usually a local leader, if they are out there why hasn’t the AJC published and highlighted them? “
If the AJC did that, those moderate voices would have their throats cut.
By Mara
February 20, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this
Van, there are quite a few moderate voices in Islam. Unfortunately, to the media (all media…) the guy saying “hey, let’s talk about this.” is not nearly as “sexy” or newworthy as the guy saying “Insult me and I will kill you!”. Here’s a name you won’t recognize - Kamal Nawash of the Free Muslim Coalition. His was the voice in the early days of the war, denouncing the formation on specifically “Islamic states”. There are others. In fact, in todays Minneapolis-StPaul Star Tribune there’s a story about a rally held by American Muslims denouncing both the recent cartoons and the resulting violent demonstrations. I’d like you to note also that a great part of the Muslim world is impoverished and lack both the education to understand the media as well as a lack of non-propaganda voices. When you’re conditioned to believe the worst of any group, you will believe anything that re-inforces your preconceived notions. Just look at the vitriol directed at the abominable gays…
By Gob
February 20, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this
Van: Do you really believe that there was a man named Job that was subjected to everything that is told in the old testament book of Job? If so, why would you worship a god that was perfectly willing to let your family be killed as part of a wager simply to test you? Even if you don’t believe it to be literally true, it certainly doesn’t represent a very loving god.
Logically is there any difference between that and praising an accomplice of the person who killed your own relative?
By kimberly
February 20, 2006 03:45 PM | Link to this
Hello Jack.
By Jack
February 20, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this
Sweet thing.
By RF
February 20, 2006 03:54 PM | Link to this
Renee- Indeed it is. I saw such predjudice, seemingly racial and economic, in how much coverage the child from Cobb got and how little the poor kid from Dekalb got. Both very tragic deaths, but such difference in media coverage.
Okay, so I’m a bit dark and cynical today. Must be the weather….nah, it’s the laundry. That tends to make me a bit cranky!
By Mara
February 20, 2006 03:54 PM | Link to this
til tomorrow…(kiss-kiss)
By Jack
February 20, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this
Jimmy should stick to building houses. He had his chance and blew it. If he had beat Reagan, the hostages would have been in Iran for 4 more years.
By Brian Curtis
February 20, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this
Zack, you’re both politically incorrect and factually incorrect.
Islam is as peaceful a religion as Christianity (if not more so—as any glance through history will show you). As always, the only real danger to humanity comes from blind zealotry and self-righteous hatred for anyone who dares to question or think differently.
That’s not exclusive to Islam; ALL religions have their sick, fundamentalist slime to contend with.
By Lyrazel
February 20, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this
Why didn’t Europe’s prior tolerance of Muslims prevent the current uproar?
You know I dont care! I dont give a rats—-
What I want to know is why American extremists wont allow me to buy beer on Sunday in this holy state of Georgia???
By kimberly
February 20, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this
Jack, Reagan’s folks brokered some deals before he was elected — some deals that were so shady that the participants later required pardons by Bush the Smarter before the details became public. Our leaders… our “protectors” have lots of deals in the Arab world, the details of which are not widely known or reported. This little contract to handle our ports was not supposed to be known to us either until after all the contracts were approved, signed, and the ca$h delivered. But don’t worry, our “protectors” will launch an investigation to find whoever “leaked” this information to the press.
And they wonder why I don’t “just TRUST them!”
By The72John
February 20, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this
Easy to make statements like that, Jack.
Isn’t it funny how Iran released the hostages mere minutes after the innauguration, and how shortly thereafter the US starting selling them weapons?
By The72John
February 20, 2006 04:13 PM | Link to this
By the way, Jack…and I mean this in the nicest way possible.
Do a little research before you criticize. It’s easy to believe the “popular” version of history, but you do no credit to yourself or to the person you malign by just repeating what you think you know.
In just a few minutes, I was able to uncover multiple sources outlining Carter’s tireless work to negotiate for the release of the hostages even after he had lost the election. It was his negotiations that resulted in the hostages being freed. Reagan gets the credit because he was in office at the time. For a whole three minutes.
You’re better than that Jack.
By candide
February 20, 2006 04:19 PM | Link to this
Jack: I have concluded these issues don’t really grab you. You just are interested in grabbing a woman.
I’m not available.
By kimberly
February 20, 2006 04:24 PM | Link to this
Grabbing a woman IS a noble cause if you know what to DO with one. So few do, these days. {;->
By RF
February 20, 2006 04:28 PM | Link to this
Jack likes to talk a little smack, but I think Mrs. Jack has a pretty good hold on him. Can’t help but flirt, but he knows where his biscuits are baking.
By chuck
February 20, 2006 04:33 PM | Link to this
Well how’s it going group? Not much going on today except for the usual 72john meltdowns. Talk about stereotypes. He has got to be about the whiniest little gayboy ever to post. Mr. persecution, wittle feelings got hurt. Mean old Boscoe and Jack K. Ya’ll should be ashamed.
Anybody wonder why Julia’s joke about athiests bothered john so much? I thought that he said he was not an athiest. Maybe I’m wrong. He’s gonna believe in God one day.
BTW john, according to dictionary.com
bigot
n : a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own.
The biggest bigot on this board is one 72john who constantly attacks anyone who does not hold the same wrong opinion as his.
I rarely if ever attack. I never tell anyone that they don’t have the RIGHT to hold their opinion though I don’t hesitate to disagree with that opinion. That is the difference between john, lozer, kimberly and the other leftist on the board and ME. I am perfectly willing to allow you the expression of any opinion you hold. john and his ilk want all Christians silenced and removed from public life if not life altogether. Wait a minute…is that another meltdown I hear?
By RF
February 20, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this
Chuck- while you try not to sound like him and pretend you’re ever so much above it all, you sure do end up sounded just as irritated by it and just as venomous in return. You bait him and then dare to sound so persecuted? What a hoot! You’re sounding less and less christian every week. Something you need to tell us??
By chuck
February 20, 2006 04:43 PM | Link to this
The reason Jimy Earl is a horrible ex-president is that he doesn’t know how to keep his mouth shut. He has the GALL to criticize President Bush’s economic policy for instance…that has got to be the biggest joke of all. Does anybody here remember the Ma;aise factor?
Carter’s so called negotiations to get the hostages back is another hilarious joke. Reagan gets the credit, because they knew he wouuld flatten Iran if anything happened there. They let the hostages go BEFORE the inauguration because the troops were already on standby to go in and get them. Talk about revisionist history. But 72john, I fully expect that from you.
By lozen
February 20, 2006 04:47 PM | Link to this
The story of Job is one of the most sado-masochistic stories in the bible. God has to convince the devil that Job REALLY loves him by torturing the poor man. Job keeps saying he loves Yahweh and will never forsake him. The devil says “he doesn’t really mean that.” So Yahweh, who is supposed to know everything, tortures Job to prove to the devil that Job does really love him! Why would yahweh have to prove something to the devil? If Yahweh knows everything why would he have to torture Job to get proof that Job loved him? Sado-masochism to the extreme.
By kimberly
February 20, 2006 04:47 PM | Link to this
Did Chuck just take MY name in vain? Oh no he Di-in’t!
Thanks Chuck, for validating my post from 11:32 this morning.
By Tim
February 20, 2006 04:50 PM | Link to this
nice to see I can leave for a couple of weeks and nothing changes
hi mah! :) now lozen… how do you know that torture wasn’t Job’s lil cup o tea… he might have been into that sort of thing
By kimberly
February 20, 2006 04:51 PM | Link to this
Lozen, good point. Might explain why these buttoned-up relgio-types are such PERVS. Seriously. That’s not a chunk I’m flinging in a turd fight. I have dipped my toe in the well of experience. Behind closed doors: P-E-R-Vs.
By Jack K
February 20, 2006 04:53 PM | Link to this
Chuck-if it weren’t for Christians you’d he have to argue with and belittle?
Christians are supposed to shut up and lighten up and take a joke. Atheists though, they offend REAL easy so tread l-i-g-h-t-l-y ok. Don’t hurt their wittle feewings….
“There once was a john from nantucket, Whose ….” (nevermind)
By chuck
February 20, 2006 04:54 PM | Link to this
Surprise surprise, NOW that old RF is out of the closet he’s defending the venemous 72john. Didn’t see that one coming.
FYI, RF…I don’t normally “bait” 72john. If you look back, most of his attackshave come after I have responded to a legitimate question from another poster. I have NEVER considered myself persecuted on this board in any real sense of the word. As you may have noticed, I answer any questions asked of me no matter how ridiculous. Yes sometimes the sarcasm seeps in, but that is honestly the product of growing up in a houseful of smart alecks who love to “jank” on each other. To me it is part of the fun. It is not MEANT to be hurtful. Usually it is either in fun OR to emphasize a point.
So feel free to keep up the attacks. I’m a real man and I can take it.
By Jack K
February 20, 2006 04:55 PM | Link to this
“who’d he have”
sorry
By chuck
February 20, 2006 04:57 PM | Link to this
So true Jack K. He’d have to go home and beat up his hubby/wife whaterver or kick the dog.
By chuck
February 20, 2006 04:59 PM | Link to this
Later dudes
By kimberly
February 20, 2006 05:00 PM | Link to this
Don’t forget to pray for us tonight, C. You know we need it!
By Jack K
February 20, 2006 05:00 PM | Link to this
Heaven help ‘em when he has a “bad” day (as opposed to all the others)!
By lozen
February 20, 2006 05:00 PM | Link to this
Hi Tim, where have you been sonny?
By The72John
February 20, 2006 05:04 PM | Link to this
It’s funny to hear Chuck claim he isn’t a bigot, and even funnier when he attempts to paint me as intolerant because I am unwilling to accept his condemnations of me and other gays sitting down.
Sorry Chuck, you are, always were, and always will be, a bigot. I only hate those who hate me first. It’s real simple Chuck. You, on the other hand, hate anyone that you imagine God has told you to.
Back to Chuck. Chuck, feel free to ridicule my masculinity, insult me, do all those things you do whenever I call you out for the bigoted piece of trash that you are. It just shows what a stereotype-believing moron you really are.
Rot in hell Chuck, along with the other Fundy Chrisitan facist garbage you associate with. As to Carter - look it up, Chuck. You wouldn’t know real history if it hit you in the face.
By RF
February 20, 2006 05:06 PM | Link to this
Chuck- I was never in the closet, but if you’re offering….NAH, I could never be that desperate!!
Quit justifying yourself. You enjoy this and draw great pleasure from calling names and throwing incendiary comments out just like all the rest. Come down off the pedestal Saint Chuck, they’re all laughing at you!
Yeah, you’re really constructive and kind. How could I ever have confused that???
By Jim
February 20, 2006 05:25 PM | Link to this
Well that wasn’t really much of a debate.
Can you imagine if the debate on the 10 comandments was debated by “those people” or their tactics. Their choice of punctuation is an explosion.
THe problem as I see it is that any fundamentalist has learned what to think not HOW to think. There is a huge difference there.
If these violent protesters knew how to properly express themselves the rest of the world wouldn’t reguard them as “nutcases”.
By candide
February 21, 2006 07:03 AM | Link to this
Yes, the story of Job can be seen as sado-masochistic, but it is so legendary that this does not intrude too much. The central sado-masochistic part of the Bible is of course the Crucifixion and the events leading up to it. I give Mel Gibson credit for understanding what Christianity is all about in his awful movie The Passion.
Incidentally, Shiite Islam is very sado-masochistic; scholars think it was heavily influenced by Christianity. Remember most of those who became Muslims in the first 2\300 years of Islam were ex-Christians.
By candide
February 21, 2006 07:13 AM | Link to this
Scratch a Christian you find an imbecile. No ability to think, or no willingness to think. A shell of impenetrable nonsense about having a personal relationship with a dead Jew whose blood will save you from some alleged punishment due to your ancestor’s disobedience towards an evil god who gives thunderbolts unto the tenth generation.
Found among a primitive tribe such a religion would elicit laughter and tears. Found among 20th-Century Americans it makes one wonder whether it would not be better for Americans to be obliterated from the face of the earth. No other modern nation has such ridiculous beliefs. I shudder at the fact that our president may share them. I say “may” share them because there is always the chance that Bush just pretends to believe this baloney.
By chuck
February 21, 2006 07:59 AM | Link to this
Norman, It’s good to have you back. I hadn’t heard anything that stupid since you left.
If you scratch a Candide, you find a Norman, no perjorative needed. No ability to walk upright. Descended from an ape less than 3 generations ago, he swings through the trees looking for little Christian children to consume.
Found among a primitive tribe such a Norman would be right at home. He might even work himself into a leadership position.
72john, looking for that first meltdown of the morning…don’t disappoint.
By Boscoe
February 21, 2006 08:00 AM | Link to this
Scratch a Christian you find an imbecile. No ability to think, or no willingness to think. A shell of impenetrable nonsense about having a personal relationship with a dead Jew whose blood will save you from some alleged punishment due to your ancestor’s disobedience towards an evil god who gives thunderbolts unto the tenth generation. You should be nicer to Christians Norman you are like them more than you think. Every post you’ve made has come from some book you have read that polarizes Christianity. Don’t you have any original thoughts of your own?
By Bruce
February 21, 2006 08:02 AM | Link to this
Candide, how did you become so knowledgable on a subject you seem to despise so much? I don’t think I would have studied the subject to such detail if I was so opposed to it.
By Brian Curtis
February 21, 2006 08:22 AM | Link to this
Bruce: That’s an odd perspective; would fundamentalists, for example, not bother to learn anything about evolution before deciding they were against… oh, wait.
I see what you mean.
By Renee
February 21, 2006 08:28 AM | Link to this
Is it possible to discuss anything besides how great Christians are, and how bad everybody else is. Why don’t we debate a subject that really matters. I think this one has been beat to death.
By candide
February 21, 2006 08:34 AM | Link to this
I would rather be descended from an ape than from some redneck, bloviating, idiot Christer.
As for you Sir Boscoe: go back to Opus Dei.
By Lyrazel
February 21, 2006 08:45 AM | Link to this
Why do Americans allow religion-based laws to be maintained in America but profoundly decry the stupidity of others who follow their different religion blindly? Should we be more concerned with other nations or our own state?
Its 21st century America, isnt it time we stopped obeying laws based on one particular religion? Blue Laws prohibit Americans the ability to buy liquor on Sunday in Georgia— it is law based on the same kind of religious dominion over the masses we see happening in many predominantly Muslim countries. We recognize the intolerance overseas but what about in our back yard? When is Georgia going to give up its restrictive Blue laws that dictate conformity to religious-sect doctrines clearly inappropriate for all citizens of Georgia? When we sit in judgment over what is right for other nations why does it keep us from addressing the multitude of rights being denied by law occurring weekly in this state?
By Mara
February 21, 2006 08:46 AM | Link to this
Brian Curtis your reply to Bruce made me spew coffee on my keyboard! ROTFLMAO!! And Bruce…those of us who question the validity of “god” probably have researched most belief systems in our quest for enlightenment. I’m not a theologian, but I’d be willing to wager that my grasp on Christianity is as good, if not better, than the average Christians. It always has amazed me that people assume that we agnostic/athiest/secular folks simply refuse to believe in god because of a perverse attraction to non-conformity. Never mind that logical inconsistancies of the doctrines themselves…
By Jack
February 21, 2006 08:50 AM | Link to this
I was busy yesterday. yes. I know where my biscuits are cooked. I eat them as often as possible. On Jimmy Carter, he had no gonads. Maybe less than Kerry, its close. Did you happen to buy a house when he was in office?
Candide. I only go for red-heads.
By Renee
February 21, 2006 08:57 AM | Link to this
Good point Lyrazel. Moving out of state and being able to buy liquor on Sunday has taken a lot of getting used to. It’s another way to place the religious stronghold on the masses. There is no legitimate reason beer/liquor cannot be purchased on a Sunday.
By Mara
February 21, 2006 09:02 AM | Link to this
Did anyone else catch the re-run of “Trading Spouses” last week? Margaret is the face of evangelic Christianity in America. Those new-agers were so nice to her and she was so very judgemental and completely unwilling to past the differences in religion and realize that there’re nice people of all different beliefs. Though I though Margaret was completely wacko, it was her blond friend that I thought was the poster child for the average Christian. Her interrogation of the pagan woman was laced with contempt and assumptions of superiority. She and her clique made a point to be unwelcoming, ungracious, and plain mean to this stranger in their midst. Pretty typical of the Christians I’ve met. I thought that she was as bad and ol’ Crazy Margaret the “God Warrior”.
By Renee
February 21, 2006 09:07 AM | Link to this
I didn’t catch the rerun, but I’m saw the initial show when it came on. Was this the woman who was hollering “GARGOYLES”?? If so, that was HILARIOUS!!! She was a nutcase to say the least.
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this
OMG, was that the one where the woman just lost it when she finally got back home to her family? Tore up the check and all (and changed her mind once the cameras stopped rolling… lol)!
That was the WEIRDEST show ever!!
Although I have to say, I understood where she was coming from. She was just wayyyyyy over the edge. WAY over.
By candide
February 21, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this
If some of those damned ice-tea drinking Baptists had a beer on Sunday they might have a little humanity in them. Have you ever seen these Christers in a restaurant after Sunday church: all washed and primped, looking like butter wouldn’t melt in their lying mouths. When a redneck gets dressed up he looks even less like a human being than when in his pickup truck with the stars and bars in back.
As they say grace before their grits — and boy can they eat — all big butted women and big bellied men — I can hear their prayer even when silent: thank you, Lord, for not making me a heathen or a Jew or a liberal yankee.
By Renee
February 21, 2006 09:45 AM | Link to this
I thought she looked remarkably similar to you JBM!! LOL
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this
The big booty white lady with the tooth-sized gap???!!!!! Okay, Big Foot, I mean Renee… It is ON.
By Renee
February 21, 2006 09:54 AM | Link to this
awwwwwww…thats wasn’t nice!!!
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 09:55 AM | Link to this
Okay, topic suggestion: Did anyone hear about this “not-so-new” trend that’s been resurfacing called, “unschooling”?
Basically, the parents allow the kids to do whatever they want, and there is no curriculum, no lesson planning, no textbooks, no homework or classwork - just fun, spontaneous “learning” in everything they do. The kids wake up when they feel like it, and decide for themselves what they want to do that day, play videogames, go to the park, watch cartoons, sleep, play on the trampoline, etc…
To be fair, at least one of the kids profiled on Dateline (or Primetime Live) was reading 3 grade levels above level. Another one had far superior standardized test scores…
By Van
February 21, 2006 09:55 AM | Link to this
Lyrazel, your elected respresentatives would like to hear from people. If a set of blue laws are not to your liking, then have them changed. It is that simple. Look how Roy Barnes changed the flag.
By Jack K
February 21, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this
Good morning all.
A father was at the beach with his children when his four-year old son ran up to him, grabbed his hand, & led him to the shore, where a seagull lay dead in the sand. “Daddy, what happened to him?” the son asked. “He died & went to Heaven,” the dad replied. The boy thought a moment & then said, “Did God throw him back down?”
A Sunday school class was studying the Ten Commandments. They were ready to discuss the last one. The teacher asked if anyone could tell her what it was. Susie raised her hand, stood tall, & shouted, “Thou shall not take the covers off thy neighbor’s wife.”
There was a group of scientists and they were all sitting around discussing which one of them was going to go to God and tell Him that they didn’t need him anymore.
One of the scientists volunteered and went to go tell God he was no longer needed.
The scientist says to God - “God, you know, a bunch of us have been thinking and I’ve come to tell you that we really don’t need you anymore. I mean, we’ve been coming up with great theories and ideas, we’ve cloned sheep, and we’re on the verge of cloning humans. So as you can see, we really don’t need you.”
God nods understandingly and says. “I see. Well, no hard feelings. But before you go let’s have a contest. What do you think?”
The scientist says, “Sure. What kind of contest?” God: “A man-making contest.”
The scientist: “Sure! No problem”. The scientist bends down and picks up a handful of dirt and says, “Okay, I’m ready!”
God replies, “No, no, no… You go get your own dirt.”
The last four U.S. Presidents are caught in a tornado in Kansas, and off they spin to the Land of OZ. After threatening trials and tribulations, they finally make it to the Emerald City and come before the Great Wizard.
“WHAT BRINGS YOU BEFORE THE GREAT WIZARD? WHAT DO YOU WANT?”
Jimmy Carter steps forward timidly: “I had a terrible time with Iran, so I’ve come for some courage.”
“No problem” says the Wizard, “WHO IS NEXT?” Ronald Reagan steps forward, “Well.., Well.., Well.., I need a brain.” “Done” says the Wizard.
“Who comes next before the Great Wizard?” Up steps George Bush sadly, “I’m told by the American people that I need a heart.”
“I’ve heard it’s true” says the Wizard. “Consider it done.”
Then there is a great silence. Bill Clinton is just standing there, looking around, but doesn’t say a word.
Irritated, the Wizard finally asks, “WHAT BRINGS YOU TO THE EMERALD CITY!?”
And Willie replies - “Is Dorothy around?”
Q: What’s the difference between Monica Lewinsky and the rest of us? A: In order for us to get some dick in the White House, we had to go out and vote.
Q: What’s the difference between Monica Lewinsky and the rest of us? A: In order for us to get some dick in the White House, we had to go out and vote.
American Indians have nicknamed Bill Clinton as “Walking Eagle” because he is so full of crap he can’t fly.
Politicians and diapers have one thing in common. They should both be changed regularly, and for the same reason!
By Mara
February 21, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this
yeah, that’s the woman. “Dark siders!” “Gargoyles!” heh, heh, heh. She obviously didn’t know that aside from the more practical use of diverting rainwater, gargoyles historically were seen as guards against evil. And they festoon the nooks and crannies of every medieval cathedral and church. Does she think that the great cathedrals of the world are now tainted by “dark sided gargoyles”? That’s what made it so funny. She knows nothing of gargoyles yet assumes, evidently because they are “grotesque”, that they must be “of the devil”. There’s so little curiosity in these people…
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this
I have to admit I felt sorry for that lady, but boy was she hilarious!!!
By DLS
February 21, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this
we are all bigots - the is a basic human construct.
Bergan County in NJ has a blue law that actually makes it illeagal to work on Sundays (except for needed services - police, fire, food and drug). What makes this funny is that the phone company has a major switch in the county and if it goes down on Sunday they can not repair it until monday.
The bet on JOB was would he love you so much if you were not so nice to him… I always took it as a metafor for ” standing by your convictions when times are good is easy - when times are bad is the true test) And no I am not a Christian - but I studied comparitive religiion in school for a few years (interest).
Didi you know that christianity wa sone of two religions (monolithic) that were competing for the status of “official religion of the Roman Empire” I forget the name of the other religion meta -something) but the “Son of God” in that religion faugth an evil bull in the desert for 40 days and nights before he vanquished it —- sound formiliar.
By Chilao
February 21, 2006 10:16 AM | Link to this
JBM - I have heard of that ‘unschooling’ concept, feared for this country in a generation or so. Wait, I do that anyway.
Saw ten seconds of the Trading Spouses and figured the comedy of mix-matched cultures would be too much so switched the channel, after all, all I have to do is come to W-2-W for that stuff.(got the jest in those ten seconds) hahahahahahahah Plus the short dark-haired woman was just too unappealing visually, all I have to do is go to a rural Southern town for more of her. Down the road, so to speak. LOL
By Van
February 21, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this
Gob, I am amazed at how many people miss the basics of the Book of Job. God did not torture Job. God, good, allowed the devil, evil, to try and shake Job’s faith. The devil lost. How many times have we seen this concept played out in Hollywood.
Whether the story is literal or not is not up to me. I believe it is a life lesson, that when bad things happen, don’t blame God, and when good things happen, thanks Him.
By Mara
February 21, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this
JBM, I suppose unschooling could work for some children. Though I would think that learning to read and write would have to have some kind of structured learning, I don’t know enough to say for certain. In addition, I don’t really know if those most likely to home-school would be the aggressively foster the curiosity and open-mindedness needed for self-directed study. That being said, don’t really care much, except if this takes off and everybody home-schools, that’ll mean I don’t have to keep paying to educate other peoples offspring.
By Chilao
February 21, 2006 10:19 AM | Link to this
saw a hilarious cartoon over the weekend: Moses standing on the bluff, tablets in hand, as the crowd gathers from further down in the valley, you can see their tents.
Moses says “First of all, I need to state that this function in no way is sponsored by the State”.
By Gob
February 21, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this
DLS - I agree about the metophor of the Job story. What I find odd is how anyone could use the story as an example of their loving god and why he allows bad things to happen. That is the kind of love i could do without. If the devil questions my faith, and god allows him to kill my family as a test, i think that is grounds for seperation…
By Chilao
February 21, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this
got the GIST in those ten seconds
By Jack K
February 21, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this
DISCLAIMER: I am from the south and I love the south. This is simply a funny joke not meant to p-i-s-s anybody off. ;)
Before heading south for a vacation, it may be a good idea to learn the language of our southern brothers and sisters. And we’re here to help…
Hah Tu Spek Suthun:
BARD - verb. Past tense of the infinitive “to borrow.” Usage: “My brother bard my pickup truck.”
JAWJUH - noun. A highly flammable state just north of Florida. Usage: “My brother from Jawjah bard my pickup truck.”
MUNTS - noun. A calendar division. Usage: “My brother from Jawjuh bard my pickup truck, and I taint herd from him in munts.”
ALL - noun. A petroleum-based lubricant. Usage: “I sure hope my brother from Jawjuh puts all in my pickup truck.”
FAR - noun. A conflagration. Usage: “If my brother from Jawjuh doesn’t change the all in my pickup truck, that things gonna catch far.”
BAHS - noun. A supervisor. Usage: “If you don’t stop reading these Southern words and git back to work, your bahs is gonna far you!”
TAR - noun. A rubber wheel. Usage: “Gee, I hope that brother of mine from Jawjuh doesn’t git a flat tar in my pickup truck.”
TIRE - noun. A tall monument. Usage: “Lord willing and the creeks don’t rise, I sure do hope to see that Eiffel Tire in Paris sometime.”
RETARD - Verb. To stop working. Usage: “My granpaw retard at age 65.”
RATS - noun. Entitled power or privilege. Usage: “We Southerners are willing to fight for out rats.”
FARN - adjective. Not local. Usage: “I cudnt unnerstand a wurd he sed … must be from some farn country.”
JU-HERE - a question. Usage: “Juhere that former Dallas Cowboys’ coach Jimmy Johnson recently toured the University of Alabama?”
HAZE - a contraction. Usage: “Is Bubba smart?” “Nah … haze ignert.”
VIEW - contraction: verb and pronoun. Usage: “I ain’t never seed New York City … view?”
GUMMIT - Noun. An often-closed bureaucratic institution. Usage: “Great … ANOTHER gummit shutdown!”
By Tim
February 21, 2006 10:24 AM | Link to this
lozen… this is a very busy time at work… don’t get a chance to check the blog out too much… but it is still a great source of entertainment… hope you are well
By Mara
February 21, 2006 10:28 AM | Link to this
DLS, the religion you are looking for is “Mithras worship”. Interestingly, Mithras worship was documented to exist well before the Zoroastrians took over the Persian empire in, oh, about the 6th Century B.C. Also interesting, Mithras was born of a virgin by immaculate conception (he was born of Anahita, an immaculate virgin mother) Mithras was born in a stable. We celebrate his birth on Dec 25th Mithras was visited by wise men bearing gifts Mithras had 12 disciples He was called the Messiah (Mithras was also the god of Darius, conqueror of Babylon, He was called “Messiah” or Christos by Jews during their Captivity.) Mithras made a Contract (or Covenant) with Man confirming an older contract with God (the Persian word Mithras literally means “Contract”) Mithras celebrated a last supper with his disciples before his death Mithras died to atone for the sins of man Mithras was resurrected on a Sunday Mithras ascended into Heaven to rejoin his Father Mithras will return to pass judgment on mankind (he was also known as the judger of souls) Mithras will send sinners to Hell Mithras will send the faithfull to Heaven On judgment day there will be a final conflict between evil and good. The forces of evil will be destroyed and the saved will live in paradise forever. Mithras is part of a holy Trinity that took human form Mithras is depicted as having a halo Mithras followers drink wine and eat bread which represent his blood and flesh. Mithras followers are baptised
And these aspects of Mithras were well accepted before the appearance of Jesus of Galilee
By Jack K
February 21, 2006 10:28 AM | Link to this
A guy came into a bar one day and said to the barman “Give me six double vodkas.”
The barman says “Wow!, you must have had one hell of a day.”
“Yes, I’ve just found out my older brother is gay.”
The next day the same guy came into the bar and asked for the same drinks. When the bartender asked what the problem was today, the answer came back, “I’ve just found out that my younger brother is gay too!”
On the third day the guy came into the bar and ordered another six double vodkas.
The bartender says “Geez! Doesn’t anybody in your family like women?”.
“Yeah, my wife…”
By DLS
February 21, 2006 10:33 AM | Link to this
thanks Mara - its been over thirty years since I was in school. I do remember that the similarities between the two sounded like one copied the other. Thw other item that is of interest is that Jesus is not in the Roman or Jewish records of that time — only in the bible…
also I still can’t type.
By candide
February 21, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this
And they criticize Brokeback Mountain! What about those twelve men wandering about together near the Sea of Gallilee? Mountain men are not the only ones to wonder about.
By Renee
February 21, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this
DLS - I agree about the metophor of the Job story. What I find odd is how anyone could use the story as an example of their loving god and why he allows bad things to happen. That is the kind of love i could do without. If the devil questions my faith, and god allows him to kill my family as a test, i think that is grounds for seperation…
Hilarious!! ROFL
By Gob
February 21, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this
The only mention of Jesus outside of the bible (and other religous writings found later) is a brief mention (and by brief, i mean along the lines of “there was a man named Jesus who was put to death, and in other news…”) in a history by the Jewish historian Josephous.
By Mara
February 21, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this
DLS, as I said in an earlier post, my search for enlightenment led to en exploration of many beliefs, so no problemo on the Jesus/Mithras thing.
Hey y’all. What do you think about Dubya handing over the security and operations of six of our major seaports to a prince from the United Arab Emirates? Does it make you feel safer?
By Gob
February 21, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this
The only time Jesus is mentioned in any historical text other than the bible (and other religious writings found later) is in a work by the Jewish historian Josephous. The mention is also incredibly brief. Along the lines of “a man named Jesus was put to death, and in other news…”
By DLS
February 21, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this
The 12 disciples – Here is an example of family values – Most were married with children, the only breadwinner of the home. Yet they deserted their families to follow Jesus. Isn’t ironic that we are told what family values are by people that had little or no regard for their families?
But on the subject of the columns - I was born of american parents in France and was there for five years — I still remember the hate and bigotry of the local people. As far a the french goes they are not tolerant of anyone and are usually down right nasty. I can not speak for other countries having not experinced it first hand. HOwever when one imigrates to a new country it is up to those people to assimulate to the hosts countries values and morals not for the host country to change for them If they are not happy with the host countries rules of behavior —-move. They did not leave their old countries becuase they were so happy there… would you?
By Chilao
February 21, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this
history by the Jewish historian Josephous
so the Jewish historians editted him out of the picture? and we are surprised, why? LOL
I would think we could agree it was these twelve men who created Christianity, especially the Saul/Paul guy.
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this
Tim, I just mentioned to Renee that we hadn’t seen you in a while. Was hoping everything was okay. Glad to see ya.
Mara, I wouldn’t mind paying for other kids’ public school education if I knew they were really learning something.
Regarding Job,
Assuming this is a true story, Job’s ordeal helped/helps a lot of people to go through their “light affliction.” His story is a testament of faith, courage, endurance, trust, commitment, dedication, etc. And, in the end, Job recovered everything he had lost, and then some.
By Cindy
February 21, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this
Ahh, Randy, Sadaam is not a religious fanatic. Actually, he tried to control and fought the religious fanatics. He didn’t even like Bin Laden.
By Jack
February 21, 2006 10:59 AM | Link to this
We should take the prisoners at Gitmo and let them be the guards.
By Renee
February 21, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this
Mara - I find it deplorable and downright unbelievable.
By whatever
February 21, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this
Back in the days of steam ships, only rich white people sailed at Sea.
One day while sailing, something suddenly happened to the ship and it was about to sink. Terrified, the white folks aboard didn’t know what to do.
Someone suggested that they do what Negroes did…”Pray”. Unfortunately, no one knew what to say. So they called Thomas, a black cook on the ship and asked him to pray.
Thomas agreed and came up on deck to pray. He started like this: Lawd one day I wuz hongry. I went to a restaurunt to git me sumpin’ to eat!…An da sign said: “FOR WHITE FOLKS ONLY.”
So I went to da water fountin to git me some water an da sign said FOR WHITE FOLKS ONLY.” Den Lawd, I went to de toilet room an da sign said: “FOR WHITE FOLKS ONLY.” So Lawd Almightee…when dis hear big ‘ol boat sanks,..let it be FOR WHITE FOLKS ONLY.”
In yo name I pray…AMEN
By lozen
February 21, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this
Okay, okay back for a moment to the topic of outraged Muslims…. I just saw four of the cartoons they are upset about and I see why they’re upset. There’s one cartoon of the prophet with a bomb in his turban. How would you christers feel if someone did a cartoon of yeshua with a bomb in his hair because SOME christers shot up an abortion clinic? You can see these cartoons at http://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/
By Gob
February 21, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this
*so the Jewish historians editted him out of the picture? and we are surprised, why? LOL
I would think we could agree it was these twelve men who created Christianity, especially the Saul/Paul guy.*
Josephous was not exactly a model Jew out to protect them by editing out Jesus. He made a suicide pact with the other generals in the Jewish army, but after the others had gone through with it, he changed his mind and joined up with Romans.
Also, Saul/Paul was not one of the 12. He came along later and never actually met Jesus. If someone made this type of claim today, we would laugh at them and them suggest they be committed. Have humans changed that much in 2000 years?
By Chilao
February 21, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this
We could also question why port security was even outsourced to a British company to begin with. And saying that some of the 9/11 hijackers used the UAE for a base of operations is kinda misleading, since they used the good ole USA as a ‘base of operations’ as well.
I am very surprised this administration is giving it a green flag. One would THINK those kind of security things should be USA controlled, by US citizens.
But a news item I heard related to this whole port thing, we really need to be as concerned about the neighborhoods alot of containers are loaded in, overseas, most some very rough neighborhoods.
By chuck
February 21, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this
Mara, amazing that you came up with such a MYTH about Mithras. Tradition about his birth holds that:
Often he is depicted springing from the living rock or from a tree; at Housesteads on Hadrian’s Wall, however, there was a tradition that he was born from the Cosmic Egg. This sculpture shows Mithras bursting from the Egg whilst holding in his upraised hands the Sword of Truth and Torch of Light.
No virgin birth there.
The so-called 12 disciples were actually a dog, a snake and a scorpion, and twin Torchbearers. The number 12 that you spoke of actually referred to the signs of the zodiac NOT disciples.
Almost all of the mentions of this religion are achaeological. While it is noted that Mithras killed the bull, there is NO evidence that it happened over a 40 day period.
Also, in Mithras the adherent would go through 7 levels, much more like Hinduism/Budhism than Christianity, which makes sense since it originated in India.
The ideas ascribed to Mithraism by Mara came about much later than Christianity as a result of melding the 2 religions together that took place primarily because of the resistence of Roman soldiers who saw Mithras as a sort of patron for them.
By lozen
February 21, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this
Mara, ah Georgie Porgie Jr. Ain’t he great? He can do no wrong! Van, I believe it is a life lesson, that when bad things happen, don’t blame God, and when good things happen, thanks Him. When good things happen, you thank god. When bad things happen you let him off the hook! If you are going to thank him for the good, shouldn’t you also thank him for the bad? I mean he’s just testing you and if you pass the test you’ll have eternal life! Why are some christians so afraid to die if they truly believe they’re going to a better world?
By Chilao
February 21, 2006 11:29 AM | Link to this
that’s right, Saul of Tarsas or whatever it was, was not one of the original 12 disciples.
By candide
February 21, 2006 11:29 AM | Link to this
Ye Christers had better head for the catacombs. The DaVinci Code movie will be out in a few weeks.
There is a wonderful scene towards the end of The Last Temptation of Christ where Jesus is having his diabolically inspired dream about being married and all that, Saul of Tarsus appears to him and tells him to go away because Saul/Paul has already figured out his shtick about saving mankind in the blood of Christ. The real Jesus could only get in the way.
By lozen
February 21, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this
Every story about yeshua is found in some other religion as well. Virgin birth was nothing new. Gods impregnating women here on earth - told over and over. Pharoahs, Roman leaders, Greek leaders - the sons of gods. Gods having to die for the sins of men - common story. It goes on and on. Archetypes - look it up Randy.
By Chilao
February 21, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this
lozen - good things = god did it.
bad things = devil did it.(god busy elsewhere or even better, it must have been something you did that allowed god to be too busy elsewhere)
makes it real real simple, you see. LOL
win/win for all.
By candide
February 21, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this
Boscoe, how will you celebrate the DaVinci movie? Since you are a papist I know you will take a drink. Were you a Baptist you would have to drown your sorrow in iced tea; I wouldn’t wish that on anyone, even you.
Ecrasons l’infame.
By Mara
February 21, 2006 11:37 AM | Link to this
Well Chilao, at least the British are closely tied to us via treaties, alliances, mutual defense pacts, not to mention culture, language, and history.
The UAE was not just a “base of operations” for the 9/11 hijackers, they also facilitated the distribution of funding for several terrorist organizations. They have been a major conduit for the sale and transfer of prohibited nuclear technology to anti-American states. These kind of government sanctioned activities are not reassuring. And guess who’s gonna introduce a bill to bar companies that are owned or controlled by foreign governments from getting control over the operations of our ports? Yup, the “soft on security” Democrats. Hillary Clinton, specifically. With the help of the NJ Senator.
By Chilao
February 21, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this
Not sure I will see the movie The DaVinci Code, saw a preview for it for the first time this weekend. I read the book, so.
I liked the Last Temptation, it another example of a big boycott/hoopla by people who had not seen it.
By Chilao
February 21, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this
PBS recently had a thing on the new very old Mayan ruins MURAL found. Mayans have a story similiar to the Gabriel/Lucifer thrown out of heaven story. But then their main god ended up being the Jaguar, that which can best KILL YOU is that which should be worshipped.
By candide
February 21, 2006 11:45 AM | Link to this
In I Claudius there is a wonderful scene where Livia tells Augustus that he will be made a god in Palmyra. As a Roman he is appalled but she tells him it is ok for Palmyra — a god-forsaken eastern region (near Palestine, actually). That says it all. All this god-man crap is fine for superstitious semites but not for real men.
By candide
February 21, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this
Here is coastal Georgia four weeks from last Friday will be the St. Patrick’s Day parade. All the Irish will be out worshipping their god, Johnny Barleycorn, by getting disgustingly drunk in the streets, while the other large religious group here, the Baptists, will be sipping their iced tea behind their lace curtains, tsk, tsking at the awful display of Catholic incivility. Religion is pretty important here — whether it is with beer, whiskey, or iced tea. We have five churches on every corner and hypocrites and pharisees and scribes everywhere.
You yokels up in Atlanta have never seen anything like it. The biggest St. Paddy’s day parade outside New York. Even bigger than Boston and Chicago, those other big Irish cities.
Maybe you thought the pope lived in Rome. Let me tell you, he just got off the boat from Cork.
By lozen
February 21, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this
According to my sources mithra and christianity were very similar. “Mithraism arose in the Mediterranean world at exactly the same time as did Christianity, and thus the study of the cult holds the promise of shedding vital light on the cultural dynamics that led to the rise of Christianity
The few texts that do refer to the cult come not from Mithraic devotees themselves, but rather from outsiders such as early Church fathers, who mentioned Mithraism in order to attack it, and Platonic philosophers, who attempted to find support in Mithraic symbolism for their own philosophical ideas.”
David Ulansey “Solving the Mithraic Mysteries” Biblical Archaeology Review (vol. 20, #5 [September/October 1994] pp. 40-53)
By Chilao
February 21, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this
Yup, the “soft on security� Democrats. Hillary Clinton, specifically. With the help of the NJ Senator.
I wonder if Karl Rove will be able to spin that as ‘those evil Democrats expect our ports to pay better wages for port security, it will make the prices of your cheap walmart goods go up’ or something like that. LOL
By Jack
February 21, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this
Wasn’t Mithra that big moth that toe up Tokyo and Godzilla came to the rescue? LOL
By candide
February 21, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this
Put the Mexicans in charge of our ports. They are already in charge of our borders.
We’re all Bushed.
By Mara
February 21, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
Chuck, you should have finished reading whatever article you cut-and-pasted from. I’m guessing that you didn’t bother to finish it, else you would know that the Roman Mithras is not the same as the Persian Mithras. Here…I cut-n-pasted for you: It is tempting to identify the Roman Mithras with the Persian Mithra, except that there is no known Persian legend or text about Mithra killing a bull or being associated with other animals. On the other hand, there is a story of Ahriman, the evil god in popular developments of Zoroastrianism, killing a bull. A possible link between Persia and Rome, which could be the stage for these changes, may be the kingdoms of Parthia and Pontus in Asia Minor. Several of their kings were called Mithradates, meaning “given by Mithra”, starting with Mithradates I of Parthia (died 138 BC). It would seem that, in those kingdoms, Mithra was a god whose power lent luster even to a king. And it was at Pergamum, in the 2nd century BC, that Greek sculptors started to produce bas-relief imagery of Mithra Taurocthonos, “Mithra the bull-slayer.” (for those interested, here’s the address http://www.crystalinks.com/mithraism.html) So if sculptures existed that dated from 200 years before Christ…Chuck? Chuck? I’m done wasting time on Chuck. I’d like to note that despite his implications, I never made any judgement regarding the veracity of Mithrasism. IMO it is just as suspect a belief system as Christianity.
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this
Did anybody see the story on John of God on Action 2 News? I think I missed it. It was supposed to come on during the 5 o’clock news last night but I forgot to watch. It’s about some dude that heals people.
By Lyrazel
February 21, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this
We could also question why port security was even outsourced to a British company to begin with.
Yes we should. We should start questioning all contracts the government has let be filled by outsourcing especially ports of entry where homeland security can easily be breached. We should question Americas civil defense and preparedness but the truth is we are so easily calmed and cocooned by luxury that when we are told there is no problem we believe it because that is easier than questioning authority. As we commute daily to our JOB (pun intended lozen) to be told what to do we are inundated with fake issues of importance and how not to think for ourself. The result LIKE Job is to watch you and your entire family get screwed eternally because you never asked WHY.
By lozen
February 21, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this
I heard that Candide! Our Norman who used to post a lot like you on this blog lived there too! You’ll appreciate this story. The last time I was at St Patrick’s day in Savannah I was sitting on a bench in one of the old beautiful squares when a very young woman came up to tell me jesus loved me and ask if I was saved. I laughed at her, told her I did not believe there was anything I needed to be saved from except George Bush. I also said why would a jewish carpenter who died 2000 years ago love me? I was not nasty to her because she was so young and inexperienced. Because I’m older, smarter, can express myself better, know far more about christianity than she did, she ended up listening to my ideas about religion for a while. She had a rather dazed expression in her eyes when we parted. I continue to hope that conversation caused her to think.
By candide
February 21, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this
All this Saviour or Messiah crap comes from Zoroastrianism. The Jews in Babylonian capitivity picked up the Persian delusion about saviours and bequeathed it to the bible and thereafter to the Christians. Don’t blame the Jews entirely: how could they know that the Christians would be even more foolish than they were, that the Christians would latch on to every Jewish delusion and make it 100% even more ridiculous. Jesus Christ, as a concept, was born in Persia. Forget Mithra, forget Mithras. All is myth.
What will those dead Baptists do when they find out that not only is there no heaven and hell, but they don’t serve iced tea in Purgatory?
By lozen
February 21, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this
whatever, I loved your joke about the sinking boat! What goes around comes around! That’s one of my 10 commandments.
By candide
February 21, 2006 12:13 PM | Link to this
Presbyterians used to say that Methodists were Baptists who could read. See how these Christers love one another.
The reason there are so many Baptists and Methodists in the South is that the Anglican clergy in the colonial period were too sophisticated and too gentlemanly to bother to evangelize the riff-raff in the back country. That left the field clear for the rabble-rousing no-nothings who pitched tents and converted the rednecks to the Baptist and Methodist churches. If everyone had stayed Anglican things would have been better. Americans in the South would be dechristianized and happy and less dangerous. Anglicanism is a way station to civilization. The rest of Protestantism is a way station to the asylum. Catholicism is a way station to Fascism. TAke your pick.
By Zack
February 21, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this
Brian Curtis—I’d expect the kind of response you gave me yesterday. Your comments in defense of Islam show you know apparently only what the six o’clock news tells you about it, but that limited, propagated information doesn’t stop you from piously sounding off as though you know something about it. You can say what you want to about me. If someone who’s both uninformed and misinformed wants to think he earned points against me, that person can. I’ve said it about you before and will again: I think you’re a sharp guy, but I think you’re also ignorant. I know of many people who justify this description.
By lozen
February 21, 2006 12:22 PM | Link to this
More about Mithra: Our earliest evidence for the Mithraic mysteries places their appearance in the middle of the first century B.C. Mithraism reached its height of popularity in the third century. Mithraism declined with the rise to power of Christianity, until the beginning of the fifth century, when Christianity became strong enough to exterminate by force rival religions such as Mithraism. Both christianity and mithraism were probably based on the astrology of the time (different from astrology presently). David Ulansey
By The72John
February 21, 2006 12:24 PM | Link to this
I don’t have meltdowns, Chuck. I have outbursts of righteous outrage when forced to deal with narrow-minded bigots who believe that they can define an entire group of people by a single trait that has absolutely nothing to do with that person’s character or ethics.
The thing that escapes you, Chuck, is that I don’t have any desire to see Christianity quashed or Christians silenced. You have absolutely every right to practice your religion and speak your mind. But I have the right to call you out as an unthinking bigot whenever you do so.
Your problem is that you are outraged when the disgusting homo dares to stand up to the schoolyard bully - that would be you. Get used to it, Chuck. We aren’t scared of scum like you any more, and one day, I pray to whatever may be listening, one of us will shatter your smug complacency. Personally, I favor the “you die of a heart attack when your son tells you he’s gay” scenario, but I’d settle for the “guy you are chastising punches you in the face” version.
By lozen
February 21, 2006 12:24 PM | Link to this
Zack, your time is up. Here come your “friends” with the white jacket for you.
By Zack
February 21, 2006 12:24 PM | Link to this
Candide—I don’t appreciate your speaking about Baptists and Methodists as you have. You need to get your facts straight.
By Zack
February 21, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this
Lozen—You mean you’re not in solitary confinement? It’s scary, honestly, that someone like you probably has children, and why do you have an obsession with making death remarks about me? Do you hate everyone who opposes your agenda? Are you a nazi?
By The72John
February 21, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this
I know of many people who justify this description.
Before you start accusing others of ignorance, you might want to make sure you’re using words correctly.
By Zack
February 21, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this
The72John— You might indeed have a point, but I think it’s obvious to all what I’m communicating in that sentence.
By chuck
February 21, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this
If we are going to have ALLIES in the Middle East we have to have economic ties with them. The UAE is probably our closest friend in the area. There is some baloney going around about their ties to terrorism. That’s all it is.
Some of the terrorists were in UAE at some point but there was no official collusion from the government. The terrorists were in MANY countries including ours. The main so-called tie has to do with the banking angle with some of the opponents saying that the UAE either funded or facillitated the funding of terrorist groups. That is also a smokescreen. Their banking system in the Arab world is somewhat like New York is for the U.S. Most of the money of the region has gone through UAE banks at some point. Since 9/11 they have taken steps to eliminate the possiblity of that happening again. They have even frozen the funds of those who were identified after the attack.
Like the great Ronald Regan said, “Trust, but verify.” We still have the authority to determine who is allowed to enter the country. I’m sure Arabic employees of the UAE company will be completely vetted before they enter. Most of the people doing the actual security work in the ports are Americans already. That is not likely to change.
While I don’t think that our ports should have ever been turned over to ANY foreign company, I think that since it has been, we should honor the contract we have until such time as they give us a reason to not do so. I’m personally sick of EVERY decision in Washington being made based on polling data rather than on common sense.
By The72John
February 21, 2006 12:35 PM | Link to this
George W. could turn over the ports to Al-Qaeda operatives and I’m sure Chuck would find some way to justify the actions of his new Messiah. Sorry - President.
By candide
February 21, 2006 12:41 PM | Link to this
A lot is happening outside our sterile discussion about religion here.
The supreme court has agreed to review some laws on partial birth abortion. This is very exciting. The court is now Bushified. We will see whether it will limit partial birth abortion which is indeed an abomination in a vast majority of cases. But whether it does so or not, the whole abortion issue will re-emerge. It will anger enough American women to get them to drop their stupid support for the GOP (Gentleman’s Obdurate Perverts)and to decide who who decide about their bodies. We need this issue to mobilize the electorate. They don’t give a darn about the war in Iraq, even though thousands have needlessly died; they don’t care about spying by the government, whether justified or not. They don’t dare about anything — but mark my word, they will and do care about abortion limitations. Abortion is rarely a good thing, sometimes a necessary evil, at times overly resorted to (partial birth) but it raises the issue of whether the government or the individual should control one’s body.
Do you want the Republican party to tell you when to masturbate, whether anal sex is ok, whether you can use birth control, and all the rest? Rise up, ye women. March on the White hOUSE AND THROW THE BUMS OUT.
By Mara
February 21, 2006 12:48 PM | Link to this
Darn. I thought the mere mention of Hillary Clinton would ignite the fire in the bellies of our resident mouth-frothers.
72John - LOL! the “guy you are chastising punches you in the faceâ€? Did you see this mornings “Get Fuzzy” comic strip?! And I’m with you on the persecution complex of American Christians. To hear them talk you’d think that the jack-booted thugs of the ACLU were kicking in doors to the sanctuary and dragging the terrified christians out into the streets, forcing them into gay marriages, and ripping the unborn children from the wombs of their women. They just don’t get it that it isn’t about taking their rights away, it’s about the government not giving them a special status as the “official religion of the United States”.
By Chilao
February 21, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this
quote: ”They’ve been a strong ally, but what about tomorrow?” Ros-Lehtinen said of the United Arab Emirates.
the radio piece I heard over this issue remarked “Most of the port employees are Archie-Bunker types anyway” implying that should anything go askew, they would be ready to kick some butt. LOL
By Mara
February 21, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this
So now the SCOTUS says that it’s okay for certain Christians to get high, as long as they are trying to “connect with God”. Regarding a church in New Mexico called “O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal”. SCOTUS says that they “may use hallucinogenic tea as part of a four-hour ritual intended to connect with God” Members believe they can understand God only by drinking the tea, which is consumed twice a month at four-hour ceremonies. Party on, Dudes!! LOL
By chuck
February 21, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this
Lozen and Mara,
Mithrism goes back all the way to about 1400 B.C. That does NOT change the fact that the issues raised by MARA came about as a result of the Romans. Just as with every other religion that they encountered in their conquests, they changed Mithraism to meet their own goals of conquest and subjection.
By chuck
February 21, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this
BTW 72john,
The contract change was approved by a bipartisan Senate Panel, Not GW Bush, though he did not oppose the change..
By The72John
February 21, 2006 01:05 PM | Link to this
yes Chuck, I know. I was making a dig at you. Duh.
By Mara
February 21, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this
And now, for all of you who raged about violence being a “muslim thing”…from Lagos, Nigeria.
“Christian mobs rampaged through a southern Nigerian city Tuesday, burning mosques and killing several people in an outbreak of anti-Muslim violence that followed protests against caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad over the weekend. Residents and witnesses in the southern, predominantly Christian city of Onitsha said several Muslims with origins in the north were beaten to death by mobs which also burned two mosques there.”
Religion. Use with caution.
And Chuck, spin, spin, spin. The Persian Mithra legend contains all the aspects I describe. Your insistance on refering only to the Roman form of Mithas shows a certain disingenuity and a disregard for intellectual honesty. Greek artisans were sculpting Mithras two centuries before the supposed birth of Christ. The legend existed before Christ.
By Jack
February 21, 2006 01:18 PM | Link to this
I could use some of that tea.
By DLS
February 21, 2006 01:19 PM | Link to this
Chuck - just a minor point but I brought up Mithraism … But you just hit the real point behind the comment - revisionist history… Every culture rewrites history to prove their points of view. No history has ever been brought forward from the losers perspective or to show unbiased points of view - to the winner goes the royalties.
By Renee
February 21, 2006 01:23 PM | Link to this
John, your 12:35 was right on point.
By kimberly
February 21, 2006 01:34 PM | Link to this
Chuck, did you pray for us? (Luke 6:28) That we might be healed of our bitter scars and have our lost faith restored?
By Zack
February 21, 2006 01:38 PM | Link to this
Candide—Progress is definitely being made. There are far more Pro-Life advocates in this country than our biased society ever would like to admit. Obviously, abortion is injustifiable, and don’t say the government is trying to control anyone’s body. No, my friend, it’s people like you who are trying to control the unborn, which you have absolutely no right to do. You really paid the Baptists and Methodists a compliment earlier; it’s obvious your idea of normal is someone walking down the road with painted hair, tattoos and piercings, and a look that couldn’t be described well as “masculine” or “feminine.” You have absolutely nooo right whatsoever (you’re not alone; no one else does) to have an abortion or try to inhibit the life of the unborn in any way. Your sick way of thinking needs to be refuted. I’m just glad there are a lot of people out there who aren’t like you.
By Renee
February 21, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this
Congratulations!!! The conversation has now turned to abortion…don’t stop there, the gay bashing is next and we will be complete for the week….in record time at that!!!
By Renee
February 21, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this
~~thinking out loud~~
I know there is a way to tie abortions to homosexuals…let me think…
here’s a start…abortion and homosexuals are nonChristian, so they must be tied together
By Scalia
February 21, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this
Mithrism goes back all the way to about 1400 B.C. That does NOT change the fact that the issues raised by MARA came about as a result of the Romans. Just as with every other religion that they encountered in their conquests, they changed Mithraism to meet their own goals of conquest and subjection.
Chuck, so why wasn’t Christianity changed when the Romans adopted it after conquesting the area?
By Mara
February 21, 2006 01:51 PM | Link to this
Zack if I don’t have the right to care for my body as I see fit, who does? You? Dubya? Chuck? I have as little desire to “control” the unborn as I do to control Christians. I just don’t want either one of them controlling me or my body. Though I don’t personally subscribe to the faith that the unborn are “alive” per se, just for the sake of arguement, I’ll go with it. By law, I can’t be forced to undergo a medical procedure to benefit another, even if that other is a child. Forcing me to emperil my health for the benefit of another is also unjustifiable. And that’s what you and your ilk want to do. You want to force me to take a chance with my health for the benefit of another.
By FatMoose
February 21, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this
Zack wrote: Your sick way of thinking needs to be refuted. I’m just glad there are a lot of people out there who aren’t like you.
Those words are so often from the one who desperately needs to head them - ahhh, the ironic world of humans;)
By kimberly
February 21, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this
*it’s obvious your idea of normal is someone walking down the road with painted hair, tattoos and piercings, and a look that couldn’t be described well as “masculine� or “feminine.� *
Um….. Forgive me for being slow, but how is Candide’s fashion sense obvious to a person only known through a blog. Are we all being filmed through our monitors? What IS Candide wearing today? What is ZACK wearing today? Hmm….
Also, isn’t it true that the outward expressions of masculinity and femininity, in terms of how one adorn’s oneself before leaving the home, change through each generation in history? Didn’t our founding fathers wear skirts, tights, and wigs?
I’m confused as to whom I’m supposed to revile today, Zack. Can you help me out?
Oh, by the way, have YOU ever been raped? Question I ask all women-haters here. Can you answer the question?
By BabyKiller
February 21, 2006 01:53 PM | Link to this
Hey folks!
I just wanted to invite all the liberals and atheists to come to my abortion party tonight! We’ve got a great evening planned.
First, we’re going to play “Pin the fetus on the trash bin” - it’s a real blast! Then, we’re going to play Hanson albums backwards so we can hear the voice of Lucifer instruct us how to best spread out pro-abortion agenda. The evening will conclude with a bonfire, and a sex party where we impregnate as many women as possible just so that we can abort the fetuses later.
Oh, and afterwards, we’re going to go to gay bars and picket them because they aren’t making women pregnant so we can abort their fetuses.
It’ll be a grand old time!
By Jack
February 21, 2006 01:54 PM | Link to this
Mara. Don’t get him started. Your arguements will fall on deaf ears.
Candide. had any she-crab soup lately?
By Renee
February 21, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this
ROFLMAO
By Jack
February 21, 2006 02:03 PM | Link to this
Beat me! hehe.
By Mara
February 21, 2006 02:03 PM | Link to this
(sigh) yeah, Jack. You’re right. I don’t know why I even rise to the bait. Far be it for me to point out that a good percentage of people are fairly common sense about abortion. Unlimited in the first trimester, regulated in the second, and only to save the health of the mother in the third. Most reasonable people would be able to agree with that. People like Zack and Fred Phelps though…
By Jack
February 21, 2006 02:07 PM | Link to this
Hey FM. Glad you’re back.
Hi Kim. Always glad to hear from you.
By DLS
February 21, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this
Abortion - This is a truly divided subject which each side having good reasons from their point of view. Personally I don’t think abortion for the sake of defining the child’s sex is right but what if a father impregnates his 12 year daughter, is it right then to abort a probably impaired child and if the girl is still small enough allowing the pregnancy to continue even though you are endangering her life.
The one question I have always had is why do most pro-life people quit support at birth. Many programs to help new mothers, educate children, help the mentally & physically impaired and many other programs to help the needy young get cut by the same people that rally around pro-life.
Another interesting statistics is that most pro-life are pro-execution… interesting
By Scalia
February 21, 2006 02:15 PM | Link to this
Hanson albums? Umm…I think that I will pass. I will be busy painting my hair magenta, getting a prince albert, and tattooing Ecrasons l’infame on my back.
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this
DLS, you’ve got questions, they’ve got answers!
Execution is okay because it’s punishment for the guilty (well, at least in some cases), whereas abortion is punishment to the innocent.
And, as for your first question, they don’t quit support at birth. They’d love to adopt and care for any one of those unwanted babies…
By Brian Curtis
February 21, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this
Zack: If you’ve got any specifics to offer, by all means present them. All you’ve done so far is make sweeping, blanket condemnations of the entirety of Islam… and based on what? You haven’t shown yourself to be well informed about it—you’re just parroting the neocon “holy war� line about Islam being inherently violent and evil. Let’s seem some proof!
Mara has already presented some powerful counter-evidence against your initial claim; do you have a response? (Other than to say “it’s obvious,� as you usually do with any issue that touches on your faith.)
BK: I’m on board; sign me up! It’ll be a swell celebration of the sanctity of ACTUAL life (compared to the lesser value of potential life), and I can think of nothing better than a special abortion party to celebrate this most important of privacy rights.
The only snag is that I’m not the one who hates gays for having sex without getting pregnant—you’ll just have to keep hating them for your own reasons there. But don’t worry; Jesus no doubt smiles on your hate, just like he wants all his followers to hate everyone around them.
Right, Chuck?
By Jack
February 21, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this
God helps those who help themselves. He gave us (some of us) brains to use. We have the knowledge to perform many procedures abortion being one of them. Stem cell research should be in the forefront because of the potential benefits. Shanti thinks that if we do stem cell research, people will purposely have abortions to obtain the stem cells. I think she was drinking too much of that tea.
By chuck
February 21, 2006 02:20 PM | Link to this
Scalia,
The Romans generally allowed regions that they conquered to maintain any religious practices that they held at the time of the conquest…as long as those practices were compatible with the goals of the Empire. Anytime that those practices needed to be changed it was done so over time.
The Romans had their own religious practices at the time and built temples to them. For the most part these ideas were not forced upon the populations of conquered nations for 2 reasons:
1) Forcing such a change caused problems in the region as people were directed to abandon their repective faiths. What the Romans did instead was to bring in the religious leaders of the area and have them make the changes incrementally.
2) The Romans treated religions as they did other cultural, political and economical practices. They adopted the practices in each region that allowed them to maintain control and economic success. To them it was nothing more than the cost of doing business.
Christianity was different. In the Middle East the predominant religion was Judaism and then there were a scattering of minor religions. Christianity grew as the disciples of Christ began spreading the Gospel. As it grew, it slowly became a threat to the empire and the Romans began to persecute the church. Christianity, unlike other religions, was a THREAT to the Roman Empire. It was a goal of the Romans to crush Christianity. Does the Colosseum ring any bells? This did not change until after 300 A.D. when Emperor Constantine became a Christian. At that time Christianity had grown to the point that it could no longer be controlled.
To answer your question Scalia, Rome didn’t change Christianity because they thought it better to exterminate it altogether. Failing that they adopted it as their own UNIVERSALLY. The argument could be made that they changed it later, the reformation being the outcome of that.
By DLS
February 21, 2006 02:21 PM | Link to this
JBM - funny… but according to Christian teachings the baby is not innocent - they carry original sin and since they are not baptized…
By Jack
February 21, 2006 02:22 PM | Link to this
“getting a prince albert” Yeoooouch! never understood that one unless the woman of the house wants you to get one so she can lead you around. (Not much danger of getting away)
By BabyKiller
February 21, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this
Scalia! Your ignorance is showing! Hanson is OBVIOUSLY the voice of Satan…how ELSE do you explain their success. I mean, they might as well have tatoos that say “Faustian Bargain” on their foreheads.
Brian Curtis - you’ve got me all wrong, man! I don’t hate gays! I just think they ought to have the decency to experiment just a little, knock some chick up, and help her have an abortion! After that, it’s all-man, all-the-time!
By Jack
February 21, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this
BabyKiller. You are off the chain.
By Chilao
February 21, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this
I was all game for the party too, until the gay bar protest, then decided I would pass. LOL Plus no way I was going to listen to Hanson ANYTHING, call me narrow-minded.
Why did I earlier think of Monthy Python’s Every Sperm is Sacred? when the Pope/Cork/Savannah comment was made, thought of that. And the poor english woman all ready to get some only to be disappointed by her boorish husband with “Well, we could (do recreational sex) IF we WANTED to”. LOL
By Gob
February 21, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this
The whole pro-life/pro-war/pro-death penalty and pro-choice/anti-war/anti-death penalty groups have always struck me as odd. Obviously the most hypocritical are in the fringes, but it is still interesting.
Why is it ok to bomb innocent buildings in Iraq, which have killed many civilians (doubtless a pregnant woman or two included), but to perform a medical procedure that doesn’t endanger the woman is an abomination? It makes one question the “culture of life.”
On the flip side, why is it ok to end the life of an innocent fetus/baby, but not ok to put to death someone who has murdered people?
I am not taking a side here, just pointing out the inherent hypocrisy associated with simply following the party line.
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this
DLS, not trying to be funny. Those questions have already been posed and answered here. I just paraphrased (and shortened) what they would say in answer to you.
Now, your other point about babies not being innocent was also asked (to chuck by me). I don’t remember his answer, to be honest. Actually, I wouldn’t be surprised if he never answered it… He tends to do that when he gets stumped.
By Renee
February 21, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this
Scalia - all that will keep you pretty busy!!!
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 02:30 PM | Link to this
Gob, see my 2:16 for your answers. And, as for the war thing: that’s okay because war is biblical, and all those innocent civilians that die are just an unavoidable casualty of war.
By BabyKiller
February 21, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this
Scalia is getting a Prince Albert and I’M off the chain!
By Jack
February 21, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this
JBM. That is called “collateral damage” Unavoidable in war.
By Chilao
February 21, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this
When the Spanish arrived and attempted to convert the Mayans, they ‘converted’ all right, brought that JC blood-concept into their existing human sacrifices. Here was a bigger power, the Spaniards, who showed them that human blood was indeed what it was all about. I can only speculate that some Mayan priests were ‘Like, dude, see, they think like us, we are right’.
one Sr. Franciscan BURNED everything the Mayans had written, in books, but one was smart enough to write a translation dictionary he kept under wraps.
By kimberly
February 21, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this
Chuck, did you pray for us? (Luke 6:28) If you ingore my question, I will assume you did not and will not. This brings your faith, and all you say based upon it, into question. If you say “No, you depraved little miscreants, you can all rot in heck!” then you gain some respect for being honest. If you say yes, (and I believe it) then I shall quietly wait to be healed and find my lost faith. (How long do you think that will take?) Thank you for your time.
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 02:41 PM | Link to this
LOL Kimberly
Thx, Jack. Couldn’t think of the term.
Now, what’s a prince albert?
By Renee
February 21, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this
JBM - trust me…you DON’T want the specifics LOL
By Jack
February 21, 2006 02:47 PM | Link to this
A prince albert is not a cigar. It is when a man gets an earring pierced into the head of his d—k. Doesn’t hurt at all.
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 02:50 PM | Link to this
EI OWIEJ OIW JEIOWO OIWEJRIOW IKPOSL; WIOTIE TIIERTT SOABOD BOIWLLD OHGHBX DXCOEW???????????
Lawd hammercy.
By The72John
February 21, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this
JBM…I can’t even bring myself to describe it…it’s a big ring that goes…through…you know…
oh hell - just do a Google image search, OK?
By kimberly
February 21, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this
I wasn’t making a joke. I wasn’t making a point. Cut straight to the point. What does a braying, judgement-filled “Christian” have to say to those who have lost faith largely due the hypocrisy of the people who proclaim most loudly to have all the answers? I’m not the only one here who lashes out with anger from pain that began long ago. Where’s the healing love? We all say things we regret. Let him PROVE his faith….
By Renee
February 21, 2006 02:55 PM | Link to this
More tongue speaking JBM??? You know us heathens don’t understand LOL
By Jack
February 21, 2006 02:55 PM | Link to this
After Scalia gets it, he’s going to see if he can lift a cinder block with it!
By Godless Anorexic
February 21, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this
I dont care what god my aborted fetus worships!
By The72John
February 21, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this
Please stop, Jack. Please!
By Jack
February 21, 2006 03:06 PM | Link to this
I know. it hurt just to type it!
By Mara
February 21, 2006 03:06 PM | Link to this
Gob I don’t see the same problems (or “hypocrisy”) that you do. The pro-life/pro-war/pro-death penalty view falls nicely in line with the “I am right” exceptionalism of the right. They seem to believe that they have the right to force women/girls to gestate and the terminally ill or vegitative person to continue living whether they want to or not. That’s the “pro-life”…pro-war is their belief that they know which political system or leader is the right kind of leader or society. If they don’t like the way your country is run, they reserve the right to bomb you into submission. And the death penalty? An eye for an eye, baby. Sometimes the innocent go down, but better to kill 20 who are mistakenly convicted than to let even 1 who “deserves” to die get away. They are always right and so see nothing wrong with making people live the way they (the right) thinks that decent people should live. The pro-choice folks think that each person should have the autonomy to live their life as they see fit. Anti-war, because we believe that societies should be allowed to decide for themselves how their countries should be run (though many anti-war people do support wars that are seen as justifiable. Many who decry Bush’s War were very supportive of the Afghanistan action, as well as the assault on Kosovo. The “just war” concept…) and as for being anti-death penalty, IMO it’s better to let one guilty guy spend his life in prison than to kill 20 innocent ones. See? Perfectly in line with the ideologies of the right and left, respectively.
By chuck
February 21, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this
Kim, I’m sorry, I thought you were just being sarcastic. The truth of the matter is that I pray for you and the others on this blog just about every day. If I post, I pray. That’s the time when it most comes to mind. I have prayed for you and others at other times as well. I usually read the posts from the day before (the ones I missed) when I get to school at about 7:00 each morning. That’s usually when I pray for ya’ll.
I know, go ahead and pour on the sarcasm.
BTW Brian, I don’t HATE ANYBODY. Life is too short to go around hating. I occasionally show irritation with you and some others…I am human according to my doctor…but I don’t hate you.
By The72John
February 21, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this
You keep telling yourself that Chuck, if it makes you feel better. Your other posts show you for the liar you are.
By Mara
February 21, 2006 03:13 PM | Link to this
I’d have to have a nice cuppa before meeting ‘prince albert”, let alone getting one! (if I could, that is!)
By chuck
February 21, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this
KIM, I can’t tell you how long it will take for you to “get your lost faith back”, but I can tell you this. You aren’t responsible for ANY hypocrite that you have come in contact with. If they have hurt you, they will be responsible for what they did.
You are however, responsible for your own relationship with Christ. While the people who claim to be Christians may have hurt you through their actions, it doesn’t absolve you of YOUR reactions to whatever wrong they perpetrated on you. Cliche’ time: 2 wrongs don’t make a right.
By Chilao
February 21, 2006 03:16 PM | Link to this
Mara - I think the same thing actually exists for women, the rings are just ALOT smaller. LOL (You figure it out)
By Eirik
February 21, 2006 03:17 PM | Link to this
I always thought a Prince Albert involved a circle of diamonds implanted beneath the skin…kind of like a crown.
I think I got short changed…kidding, just kidding.
By The72John
February 21, 2006 03:18 PM | Link to this
Chuck, you DO understand that YOU are one of those mean-spirited hypocrites she’s talking about, right? Are you really so colosally stupid that you don’t understand that?
By Jack
February 21, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this
Hey, you would never lose your keys. LOL
By Mara
February 21, 2006 03:28 PM | Link to this
ohhhhhh! yow! Chilao, I’m a librul but I ain’t that liberal! LOL Jack, you won’t lose your keys and none of your friends will want to borrow your car :^)
By Jack
February 21, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this
I believe Chuck when he says he prays for us. Zack and Boscoe do too if they are good Christians. Thanks Guys. I can use all the help I can get.
Kim. Hang in there darling. You are loved.
By DLS
February 21, 2006 03:30 PM | Link to this
Gives new meaning to stick shift —- how would you sit and drive
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this
Chuck is far from stupid, John. He’s just blinded. I really don’t think for a minute that he has a clue that he’s doing more harm than good… that no one (here) will ever be converted as a result of anything he says… that if he is a representative of Christ, then no one wants to know Christ… that no one here wants to be like him or have what he has.
He just doesn’t realize it, John. Can you realize that?
By Jack
February 21, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this
In the movie with Carmeron Diaz & Christina Applegate one of their friends got her braces stuck on her man’s prince albert while doing a Lewinski on him. Double yeow!
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
Okay, I take back my first sentence. I guess it’s debatable. I should have said that in my opinion, Chuck is far from stupid.
By Jack
February 21, 2006 03:38 PM | Link to this
You’re right JBM.
By chuck
February 21, 2006 03:38 PM | Link to this
I’m well aware of that foolish john, yet I answered the question anyway.
By Mara
February 21, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this
Unfortunately JBM, he’s not far enough (from stupid). Maybe he could borrow Jacks keys…
By The72John
February 21, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this
Apparently he does realize that he is a mean-spirited hypocrite. Apparently he doesn’t care, either.
Ah well, no one will mourn when he is hit by a truck.
By Jack
February 21, 2006 03:43 PM | Link to this
Now I didn’t say I HAD one. No, no, no! No piercings will deface this property.
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 03:43 PM | Link to this
John, just remember that he really doesn’t know any better. I’ve known people like Chuck all my life. Trust me, John, he really doesn’t know any better.
By Sanhan
February 21, 2006 03:45 PM | Link to this
Hello folks. I see we’re still debating religion, abortion, and now the outsourcing of our ports to the UAE. I read this story about the ports two Saturdays ago; that’s when you know a news story is significant, when the government releases it on Saturday when fewer people read the papers.
Regarding the pro-choice/anti-death penalty with anti-choice/pro-death penalty paradox, I personally look at this as the government has no right to define when life begins, nor when it should end. Mistakes will be made, and the stakes are too high and results too grievous.
Thanks for the prayers, Chuck. Right back atcha.
And while we’re talking politics and religion, why not add fascism just for kicks? This is eerily familiar and where our administration is leading us, so I thought I’d send this along.
Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each:
Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.
Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government’s policies or actions.
Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
From Liberty Forum
http://www.libertyforum.org
By Mara
February 21, 2006 03:48 PM | Link to this
Sanhan, rule-of-thumb…invoking Hitler = your argument just “jumped the shark”. Doesn’t move the discussion along.
By Jack
February 21, 2006 03:48 PM | Link to this
None of the fundamentalists ever answer when I ask them if they ever had sex for fun. Everyone knows it is for procreation only. The missionary position is the only one acceptable and the act must be done as quick as possible so that little pleasure is felt.
By Chilao
February 21, 2006 03:48 PM | Link to this
I had a pierced ear in high school, obviously long before it became fashionable. LOL I long ago decided I wanted NO piercings or tattoes.
coming to find out, it is a Biblical law about the tattoes, why the arm tattoing the Germans did of the Jews was considered a grave/serious insult. I never knew about the Bible law until I mentioned my no-tattoes rule(of myself) to someone who studies that stuff more than me(putting it nicely). LOL
By Jack
February 21, 2006 03:50 PM | Link to this
Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.
Will never happen. Women control half the money and all of the coochie.
By Mara
February 21, 2006 03:56 PM | Link to this
Jack, 4 little words…Concerned Women For America. When half of your group truly believes that God made them to be inferior…
anyway. ta-ta til tomorrow.
By The72John
February 21, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this
Comparing someone to Hitler is not productive, but Sanhan has listed just components of facism and described the source from whence they came. Hitler wasn’t the only facist and neither will he be the last. It’s perfectly valid to invoke the specter of facism, since we seem to be treading ever-closer to it.
JBM - I can’t accept the “he doesn’t know it” argument. I, too, have known many people like Chuck and seen the damage they can do to others. Aren’t you in the least bit concerned that he has partial responsibility to shaping young people’s minds? How many teens do you suppose he’s warped and scared with his ugly prejudices and bigotries?
By Jack
February 21, 2006 04:02 PM | Link to this
My group? God did not make women inferior, just different. Thats all I’m gonna say on this. I don’t wish to open that can of worms.
By Jack
February 21, 2006 04:04 PM | Link to this
Good Night All!
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 04:09 PM | Link to this
OMG, least bit concerned is a major understatement, John. As pitiful as it sounds, there have been times that I have literally shed tears over some of the things Chuck has said to you all. It hurts me to no end that this man publicizes himself as a representative of Christ. It hurts me to think of how many people will turn away from Christ because they think that Chuck is his representative. Believe me, John, I am certainly concerned. I’ve just come to realize that there’s nothing I can say to him to help him realize the error of his approach, so the best thing for me to do is to encourage those that he tries to condemn. And, remind them that Chuck is a hopeless cause who really doesn’t know any better.
By The72John
February 21, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this
JBM, you’re just too good for this world :-)
By chuck
February 21, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this
What’s really sad JBM is that you don’t understand what it is that I’m doing. I believe in total honesty. The old saying “the truth hurts” still holds true. We have always followed that with our kids, in our relationship as husband and wife, at work, in church, wherever.
I could try to espouse a sugarcoated message like you do, but it would be dishonest. That is not the message of the Bible. There are not a whole lot of “gray areas” in the Bible. It is pretty clear when it speaks about sin. It is crystal clear when it speaks about the relationship we are supposed to have with Christ and the consequences of rejecting that relationship.
While your message may make people feel good about themselves temporarily, it is a message that is sending many to hell. They think (because you tell them)they can do whatever they want and that God is just going to sit by. Most Christians call that “Easy Believism”. Jesus does not come in as Savior without coming in as LORD. That means a CHANGE in lifestyle from OUR way to HIS way. It means us giving up our right to control our own lives.
I know you think that you are doing these folks a favor, but it is really a disservice. There is a movie called April Morning about the battles of Lexington and Concord. Tommy Lee Jones plays a farmer in Lexington and one of the best lines in the movie is when he tells his wife that the greatest honor you can show toward God and a fellow man is to tell them the truth. Not a sweetened up version of the truth but the TRUTH.
As Christians we have a great treasure within us but it was not given to us for our own benefit but for others. The Christian life that I speak of sounds restrictive to those without faith because they are clinging to a life that they think belongs to THEM. There is no greater liberty than that of knowing Christ and living the Christian life. Are there things that the flesh wants to do that I can’t do as a Christian? Of course. But every desire I had to give up for Christ was replaced with something so much better that there is no comparison. That is the message of the Cross.
By The72John
February 21, 2006 04:26 PM | Link to this
Chuck, one day you will preach to the wrong person. You will condemn the wrong person. You will shove your “faith” down the wrong person’s throat, and that person will shove back.
I can only hope that day will come sooner, rather than later. The world needs fewer Chucks in it.
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 04:28 PM | Link to this
What’s really sad JBM is that you don’t understand what it is that I’m doing.
I understand exactly what you’re doing. You’re turning people away from Christ. I have yet to see one person here who expresses a desire to know more about your life or the Christ you follow as a result of your rantings here.
I believe in total honesty.
Who cares what you believe in? What does the bible say about telling the truth? It says to tell the truth in LOVE, something you apparently don’t know much about. You claim to love the people here, but you show them no love, only contempt and judgment. When have you ever shown love on this blog? NEVER.
They think (because you tell them)they can do whatever they want and that God is just going to sit by.
I’ve never told anyone that, and I don’t believe that myself.
Oh what the heck. I’m not wasting my time going through this with you again. I stand by what I said, and any true Christ-follower knows I’m right. YOU HAVE NO IDEA what kind of harm you’re causing. You’re completely clueless.
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this
And, speaking of the Bible… I’m reminded of Galations 6:1 which says, “Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual should restore him in the spirit of meekness, Considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.”
Clear cut instructions for what you should do if you think a person is overtaken by their faults.
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 04:32 PM | Link to this
Sorry, that’s Galatians, with an “a”
By Sanhan
February 21, 2006 04:41 PM | Link to this
Mara, the reference to Hitler was not mine, it was part of the Liberty Forum quote. While I normally do not bandy Hitler’s name about in my discussions, I do think that Britt’s inclusion of Hitler helps illustrate fascism, particularly for those of us who are not well-versed in world politics. I would argue that his exclusion of Hitler would be suspect. If you ask most folks here what kind of government we have, they say “democracy” when we are actually a republic. If asked what Nazi Germany was, I would say dictatorship and maybe not make the connection to fascism.
By chuck
February 21, 2006 04:42 PM | Link to this
I’ve never CONDEMNED you or shoved my FAITH down your throat. I have condemned your chosen LIFESTYLE and I’ve stated that I will do what I can to see people change from homosexuality to a pure moral life taught in scripture. I have NEVER advocated any violence toward you or your kind. I have condemned those who have perpetrated violence on gays. I have stated WHAT my Faith is and what the Bible teaches. I don’t believe I have ever or could ever force you to adhere to it or in any other way except through arguments and persuasion tried to change your way of thinking. So tell me 72. HOW have I “shoved my faith down your throat”.
If you are capable of thinking rationally, who is it that almost ALWAYS threatens violence? Who is it that almost always resorts to the vilest of name-calling? It isn’t me, though I do occasionally make fun of your lack of masculinity. If there is a vile person here, it is you 72. Take a good long look in the mirror.
By chuck
February 21, 2006 04:50 PM | Link to this
JBM, that was written to Christians ABOUT Christians. The context is as follows:
1Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted. 2Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. 3If anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself. 4Each one should test his own actions. Then he can take pride in himself, without comparing himself to somebody else, 5for each one should carry his own load. 6Anyone who receives instruction in the word must share all good things with his instructor.
7Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature[a]will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. 9Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. 10Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.
I’m all for restoration of believers who stumble. I know the consequences for NOT restoring those who have sinned, but over and over again you forget or deny that restoration comes AFTER repentence. God NEVER says to accept those who continue in the sin. Jesus Himself always said go and sin NO MORE. You can deny and deny but what you are doing is WAY more harmful to the cause of Christ.
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 04:53 PM | Link to this
It isn’t me, though I do occasionally make fun of your lack of masculinity.
Now THAT’S the Christ I want to follow. Yes, that’s Him.
And, for the record Chuck, John doesn’t purport to represent anyone but himself. He doesn’t speak on anyone’s behalf, so if he wants to use vile language and get violent, there’s no harm done.
You, on the other hand, brag about being a Christian and represent him about as well as Beelzebub.
By Just Being Me
February 21, 2006 04:56 PM | Link to this
And, references to “you people” is not a condemnation of a lifestyle, it’s a condemnation of the people who follow that lifestyle. Face it, you condemn people in the name of Christ.
As I often say, I’m so glad that I met Him before I met you. Otherwise, I’d NEVER have wanted to know Him.
By The72John
February 21, 2006 04:57 PM | Link to this
First off, Chuck, you have no idea about my masculinity. You only ASSUME because I am gay and you have the typical south georgia redneck hick stereotypes about what that means.
Second, if you think you haven’t condemned people over and over again, then you are a bigger idiot than I think you are. Every time you get worked up into one of your religious frenzies you start condeming people to hell over and over.
Third, it isn’t my CHOSEN anything, you ignorant south Georgia hick. If that’s how you can justify your hatred, by assuming I’ve CHOSEN something, let me be the first to dissuade you of that particular piece of ignorance, vain though that attempt may be. We don’t CHOOSE our sexuality Chuck. If you can identify the moment you sat down and decided you were going to bang women, I’ll eat my socks.
As to my name-calling, etc., I believe I’ve explained that rather thouroughly to you, Chuck. You are my enemy. You are scum. I despise you and everything you stand for NOT because of what you are or of your religion, but because YOU have decided that I am not worthy of the same treatment as other people. YOU go after me and mine. YOU are bigoted trash.
YOU are the reason that gay men are beaten to death on the streets. YOU are the reason that gay men are so scared to be who they are that they marry and have children and live secret lives that sometimes destroy that family.
YOU, Chuck. YOU and other people LIKE YOU. I despise you and everthing about you. If you were on the street and someone shot you, I would step over your twitching corpse and spit on it. Get it? You have heaped such pain on other people without caring one whit about it you don’t deserve anything from me but scorn and disgust.
I really hope that answers your questions, you piece of filth. If you were worth civility and reason, I would give it to you, but you aren’t. You aren’t even worth the disgust I feel for you, but unfortunately you and others like you have made that disgust unavoidable.
I hope you rot in the hell you have made for yourself, Chuck. You are a vile human being who thinks he is a good person. Do us all a favor and die as quickly as possible.
By candide
February 22, 2006 07:01 AM | Link to this
Chuck should be made to write one thousand times on the blackboard: I love Brokeback Mountain!
By chuck
February 22, 2006 08:02 AM | Link to this
Starting and ending the day with a meltdown john? I’m starting to worry about your health. Don’t blow a gasket now.
As usual JBM you ignored the important part of the post…scripture. You just don’t know the REAL Jesus. You have created your own “mini you” god that has no basis in reality. In effect, you have created god in your own image. When Jesus comes into your life He becomes preeminent. “The Lord your God is a jealous God”. He demands to be Lord of all or He won’t be Lord AT all in your life. He doesn’t take second place.
You’ve given in to the “pleasures of this world” JBM. That of course is YOUR CHOICE, but don’t expect God to honor that. It is sin plain and simple.
By The72John
February 22, 2006 08:04 AM | Link to this
My apologies for yesterday’s outburst, or meltdown as some like to call it.
I don’t truly wish harm on anyone, even on Chuck. My anger at him and others like him causes me to react irrationally sometimes.
I’ll see y’all next week - I’m not contributing anything in the current debate and continued participation will only make things unpleasant for me and everyone else.
Sorry again - enjoy the rest of the week.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 08:05 AM | Link to this
BTW 72skidoo, I have never condemned ANYONE to hell. Again, like your lifestyle, that is an individual CHOICE. Last time I looked, I’m not God. He told us HOW we get to heaven, but WE choose whether or not to go there. You have apparently chosen a different destination for yourself. I hope it’s worth an eternity in hell.
By Renee
February 22, 2006 08:16 AM | Link to this
Don’t let ignorance run you off John.
By Brian Curtis
February 22, 2006 08:23 AM | Link to this
Chuck: The problem you’re encounter is that your god—at least, the way you present him—has zero appeal to anyone who doesn’t currently attend your church.
Why SHOULD anyone worship the kind of deity you’re talking about—one full of judgmental hatred and bigotry? Why would anyone WANT to? And frankly, what kind of sicko are you that YOU want to worship a psychotic monster like that?
These are questions that you have to answer and JBM doesn’t… because JBM’s god actually seems to be good and deserving of respect. If your god truly IS a benevolent being—then you’re doing a p-iss poor job of representing him.
By candide
February 22, 2006 08:34 AM | Link to this
Chuck: why are you so concerned about being saved, about going to heaven? What eats at you, man?
Did your parents scare you about hell? Was your life hell? Why does hell figure so much in your vision of things? Wouldn’t you be a lot happier without that evil religion of yours?
By Lyrazel
February 22, 2006 08:35 AM | Link to this
72John—spare yourself the grief, sir. Most people here just are not as articulate as you were but have wanted to say what you said MANY times to the sanctimonious.
sanctimonious (sank-ti-MOH-nee-us), adj. making or marked by a hypocritical and often smug, intolerant show of religious devotion, morality, righteousness, etc. A fundamental characteristic of sanctimonious behavior is how obvious the insincerity is to the observer.
Kind of fits doesnt it?
By Mara
February 22, 2006 08:50 AM | Link to this
just to toss some kerosene on the fire - Chuck opines that it is our own mis-used “free will” that will damn us to hell. But (supposedly)God knows everything. God made us. God knows that we will follow our nature (as he has made it). God knows which of us are going to hell (because he’s all knowing, all seeing, etc). Therefore, it seems to me that Chucks God creates some individuals with the full knowlege that this particular person or that particular individual will end up in hell. When he was a little god, did he pull the wings off flies, too?
By chuck
February 22, 2006 08:54 AM | Link to this
MARA, Knowing what they WILL do is not the SAME THING as MAKING them do it.
By True Confusion
February 22, 2006 08:59 AM | Link to this
But why would he create someone he knows will burn for all eternity? Why would he subject one of his children to that?
By chuck
February 22, 2006 09:00 AM | Link to this
Candide, just to remind you, when you were in your alter ego NORMAN, I told you I wouldn’t be responding to your little posts because your questions are inane AND you bore me. Post all you want, I’ll ignore s’more.
By candide
February 22, 2006 09:00 AM | Link to this
Ah, Chuck. When you shove off this mortal coil you will perhaps know that that’s all there is. No heaven, no hell, no atonement, no redemption, no Jesus, no Yahweh.
Think for yourself, man. Has God ever spoken to you? How do you know who it was? Why is your imaginary world so much more real than the world of sensory perception? Is your sensory world so painful? Are you crippled? Mamed? Ugly? Unlovable and unloved? There must be a reason you would settle for a world of imagination. Are you still a child? Fairy tales have nice ending, don’t they?
By Whiley
February 22, 2006 09:06 AM | Link to this
Well, I was away on holiday for a long time & thought I was going to miss everything. lol It seems nothing changes around here does it? All right, I’ve had three weeks off & now it’s time to say my peace. My opinion on this topic is: I’ve had it up to here with you people. All of you. You Muslims, Jews,Catholics, Protestants, Hindus, Buddhists,Scientologists, Quakers, Jehovah’s Witnesses,neo-pagans and Satanists. Even you atheists & whoever else whatever you’re called. I’m fed up with all of you—all 6.6 billion of you. God dern it, I’m mad. Holy freakin Jesus, I can’t even swear without sounding like one of you. What has gotten into you people these last few thousand years? You’ve all turned into nutjobs, every last one of you. You’ve all joined your little cults, and you do your little rituals, sing your little songs, and you all think you’re better than all the others, and you pass all this crap on to your freaky little children, and I’m sick of it. What’s wrong with you? Some of you couldn’t cope with the concept of death, make up some weird reason for it all, and look what’s become of you. You’re a mess & your debates are so boring I want to gouge my ears out after hearing it all my life. And STOP knocking on our doors giving out your boring chatter in your little brochures. It’s a colossal waste of everybody’s time & money that it costs to print it all up. It’s only going to end up in the dump. Stop adding to the garbage crisis.
For the last couple of weeks, thousands of you religious goons have been rampaging in places across the globe, breaking windows, burning buildings, hollering like jackasses over some stupid cartoons published in some obscure newspaper in some obscure European country. What, just because they drew your prophet? Oh, my goodness, not a picture of the prophet! For the love of Muhammad, get over it!
I’m hearing we should be more tolerant, try to understand their anger. Anger over what? I don’t care who you are you can’t go running around destroying property that doesn’t belong to you & causing havoc & fear. There’s nothing to talk about. Arrest them all. I don’t want to read another religious debate about it. I want everyone to shut up. I’m tired of listening to it.
You religious crazies have been clashing forever, so these developments are really nothing new, but this instant-information age is enabled you to spread your lunacy faster and over a wider area, and you’ll increasingly have access to incredibly destructive devices & try to legislate your morality, so it’s getting harder and harder for me to dismiss your zany antics the way I used to.
Do any of you religious ever really listen to yourselves? One of many examples are the 400,000 + embryos in a deep freeze at fertility clinics all over this country. Most of these will never end up as human beings. Yet religious nutjobs would rather hold funerals for the embryos than allow scientists to continue their work on stem-cell research so that someday those cells may cure the sick and repair the disabled. Why? All based on fanatical devotion to a religion. Nothing based on logic. Dont get me started on marriage, sex & birth control.
I’ll be forever grateful to my parents for not filling my impressionable mind with religious garbage, but the pathetic part, for me, is that there are so few of my kind—and too many of you. So do your duty today & everyday. Tell a religious nut to Shut the Hll up !
That felt wonderful to finally say. What a nice day this is going to turn out to be. :)
By chuck
February 22, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this
They were created before there was an earth. Their appointed time to be born was set before there was such a thing as time. The truth is that God put all that in place at creation. He didn’t make humans to be puppets. In order for us to choose Him, there had to be another choice available. There are MANY questions that I have as well, that I will never understand on earth. The Bible teaches that all of those questions will be answered clearly in heaven.
By Randy
February 22, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this
The thought for the day, believing in God vs. accepting Jesus as lord and savior is equal to, believing in a parachute and actually having one on when you jump from the plane at 10,000 feet(or however high one jumps).
By Brian Curtis
February 22, 2006 09:12 AM | Link to this
Randy: Actually, believing in God & accepting Jesus is more like hoping you have a parachute, as opposed to packing one for yourself.
By Lyrazel
February 22, 2006 09:14 AM | Link to this
The bible (no matter whose version) teaches us that laymen should never preach.
Dont get me started on marriage, sex & birth control
O please, do start! Start with marriage—has it evolved or is it still contract-based?
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 09:18 AM | Link to this
The problem you’re encounter is that your god—at least, the way you present him—has zero appeal to anyone who doesn’t currently attend your church.
If your god truly IS a benevolent being—then you’re doing a p-iss poor job of representing him.
Quotes of the day. I’ll be re-posting them throughout the day as frequently as I possibly can.
By Brian Curtis
February 22, 2006 09:21 AM | Link to this
JBM: In that case, please fix my typo! It should have said “problem you’re encountering, but I was in a hurry.
By True Confusion
February 22, 2006 09:21 AM | Link to this
In order for us to choose him, there had to be another choice available.
So, we are created so we can choose him? Is your god that vain, that he had to create a world, a universe, of people just to see how many would choose him?
They were created before there was an earth.
It doesn’t matter when they were created. He knows all. Your god created people he knew would go to hell.
By Gob
February 22, 2006 09:23 AM | Link to this
I have never condemned ANYONE to hell. I hope it’s worth an eternity in hell.
Chuck, those two sentences are in one paragraph from you.
By Chilao
February 22, 2006 09:24 AM | Link to this
alright WHILEY, way to go, well said. LMAO
what a post to come into.
I am going to have to send that post to a friend or two.
By Whiley
February 22, 2006 09:26 AM | Link to this
Lyrazel you want me to discuss sex? Is that allowed? I’m not sure I can due to the fact the names of certain body parts are not allowed to be typed in public. Why is it shameful to say p*** & v****? They’re just body parts. I know, tell a religious nut today that they should love & appreciate their p*** or v****, not be ashamed of it. lol !
Now about marriage, it will always be contract-based due to the fact money is involved. I think marriage was created to keep up with who fathered what baby. That’s why sex was/is only allowed within marriage. Otherwise, there was no way to control what father belonged to what baby. That was then, now thank goodness for DNA technology & birth control.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 09:27 AM | Link to this
Chuck:
You just don’t know the REAL Jesus.
If YOUR Jesus is the REAL Jesus, then I guess you’re right. I don’t know Him and I don’t want to. I know the Jesus that the Bible speaks of. And, I like Him a heckuva lot more than I like yours. He comforts me when I’m sad, chastises me when I’m wrong, encourages me when I’m down, and helps me figure out just what to say to uplift others - when I have no idea what to say. If that’s the FAKE Jesus, I’ll take Him.
You’ve given in to the “pleasures of this world� JBM.
Honey bunch, having been in both heterosexual and homosexual relationships, let me assure you that loving a woman is no more “pleasurable” (for me) than loving a man. It’s just foolish to assert that loving a woman is giving in to the “pleasures” of this world when one could’ve said the same about every man I’ve ever dated.
By Renee
February 22, 2006 09:28 AM | Link to this
Confusion - great post 9:21, doesn’t make much sense does it??
He creates us, BUT he knows from the start whether we are going to choose him or not, he gives us free will, but he knows what we are going to do before we do it, the contradictions are amazing.
By candide
February 22, 2006 09:30 AM | Link to this
Chuck shows us that religious folk are hopeless.
By Whiley
February 22, 2006 09:30 AM | Link to this
Why thank you Chilao !
:)
By Van
February 22, 2006 09:31 AM | Link to this
Sanhan, Actually, the news of the ports change came out last November with the Brits wanting to move on, like all things in DC, it only makes headlines when people are uninformed.
The ports deal is strickly a management change. Same people doing security, loading and unloading ships, etc.
Company “A” will manage the ports instead of company “B”. The Brits are moving on. DP World is the 3rd largest ports manager in the world. Finacially it is a good deal, politically, it is a hot potato.
By Renee
February 22, 2006 09:31 AM | Link to this
I think loving a woman is definitely a pleasure of this world. ~sigh~ I’m just hopeless and hell destined. LOL.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 09:34 AM | Link to this
The problem you’re encountering is that your god—at least, the way you present him—has zero appeal to anyone who doesn’t currently attend your church.
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
If your god truly IS a benevolent being—then you’re doing a p-iss poor job of representing him.
By Bruce
February 22, 2006 09:35 AM | Link to this
Hey Whiley, take a breath and tell us how you really feel.
(Just kidding)
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this
LOL Renee
By kimberly
February 22, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this
72John, yesterday I wanted to hold your hand, squeeze it tightly and say NOTHING until the rage passed. He’s not worth it. Have peace…
By RF
February 22, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this
The problem you encounter is that your god—at least, the way you present him—has zero appeal to anyone who doesn’t currently attend your church.
well said, well said!!
Therein lies the problem folks. God is being misrepresented here. I’ve basically decided I’m not setting foot in any baptist church again if I can help it. It amazes me that people still want salvation the way God has been represented here. I’m sure he’s really proud of us for showing him to be such an angry, malevolent force.
‘nuff said. I’m not attacking anyone in particular, Chuck, so don’t get all ripped up about it. I’m out of here for today. Have fun JBM—at least one person seems to know a LOVING God here!
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 09:40 AM | Link to this
Yeah, I felt that interruption of peace too, Kimberly. It’s amazing how Christians are supposed to share peace, and yet Chuck can disturb a person’s peace just as easily as satan could.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 09:43 AM | Link to this
Wasn’t that well said, RF? Credit to Brian Curtis, I’m just quoting him.
Chuck is about as loving as satan.
Hmmm, he’s also as kind as satan, as gentle as satan, as meek as satan, as peaceful as satan, as judgmental as satan, as condemning as satan, as evil and cunning as satan…
I think I’m on to something here.
Chuck isn’t Christian. He’s… well, you can figure it out.
By Renee
February 22, 2006 09:44 AM | Link to this
Possibly, Chuck does not even believe what he says. Maybe he says it to “stir the pot up”.
By RF
February 22, 2006 09:44 AM | Link to this
~waving~ (still can’t get the stereotypical wrist thing right) HEY RENEE!! Too funny! Move over sistah, there’s apparently plenty of folks on the road witcha!!
By Jack
February 22, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this
Chuck is having much fun this week at the expense of John. Chuck keeps casting and John keeps biting. Watch that blood pressure.
By Chilao
February 22, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this
Beelzebub
learned something new yesterday, did a web search and by the time I was done reading it was too late to post here. there was even a pic of him and everything, some fly-kinda guy with fangy mouth. Reminded me of the horse flies that zap me from time to time. prolific in the springtime and drawn to my smelly sweat. LOL
Now when I swat/kill them I can go “Die, Beelzebub, Die”. LMAO
By Whiley
February 22, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this
lol Bruce.
It just seems to me that too little of we normal folks don’t speak out when the religious are spouting their nonsense, trying to change laws to suit themselves, attacking others, rioting & killing, or butting into everybodys sex lives. Because they are doing it in the name of religion people back off.
For instance, the man in California who’s execution has been put off. Apparently they are having issues with making sure his execution is painless. Didn’t he beat a young woman to death with a hammer & stab her? WHICH RELIGIOUS NUTS want him to peacefully pass???? They need to call me & I’ll march over there with MY hammer.
By Mara
February 22, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this
Chuck, I never said “he made them” use their free will to thwart his directives. I did say that he made them knowing that they would, without a doubt, “choose” to do things that would send them to hell. But Renee said it better than I in her 9:28 post.
By candide
February 22, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this
California could import some death squads from Arab states for executions if they cannot find doctors to cooperate.
Arabs have some talents, after all.
All folk do.
The Irish sing and dance. The Germans fight well. The English play cricket. Americans are good at religion and car races. Russians drink well. Greeks, Jews, and Armenians are good at business. Arabs make excellent executioners.
By Renee
February 22, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this
The APPROPRIATE way RF is to wave while twitching the wrist, and instead of saying HEY RENEE, it’s HEYYYYYYYY GIRL (while skipping towards me)don’t worry, RF, I’ll be working with you in the months to come. After all, you are a representation of all of us…
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 10:00 AM | Link to this
LOL@ Chilao. For some reason, you just reminded me of Cartman.
RF, for a visual lesson, watch Jack on “Will & Grace.”
By Jack
February 22, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this
Hi Whiley.
By Gob
February 22, 2006 10:02 AM | Link to this
Whiley - I highly doubt it is religous nuts that are wanting him to pass peacefully. They are usually the ones cheering executions. You know, the culture of life and all…
By Renee
February 22, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this
LOL JBM, that does sound like Cartman..
RF you can also get tips from Mr. Garrison on SouthPark, although he is a little on the deep end, society does stereotypically expect that type of behavior.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 10:11 AM | Link to this
Renee, slightly reminds me of Cartman’s birthday party (the same episode where Jesus and satan had the boxing match), and Stan bought him Ants in the Pants and he totally freaked out screaming, “I hate you. I want you to die!!!!!!!” LOL!
Oh, wait a minute. I know why that reminded me of SP. When the announcer brought satan into the ring, he called him “Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeel-zebub!” (like the “Heeeeeeeere’s Johnny” from the Tonight Show).
LOL. Okay, I watch way too much TV.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this
Executions shouldn’t be painless. They should hurt a lot.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this
So JBM, what did your Jesus say to the woman at the well? “Hey girlfriend, that slut thing is fine with me…and hey, if you want to throw in a girlfriend on the side go for it. After all, sexual pleasure is much more important than a life of self-denial and thinking of others.”
You are completely out of touch with the reality of scripture. Your skull must be several inches thick if you can’t understand the concept of a God who is both loving and merciful on the one hand but who is also JUST. For all of the verses you can pull out of context in scripture talking about God’s love, I can show you the verses of His JUDGEMENT. They go together hand in hand. Read the BIBLE girl, not the homosexual manifesto.
There is a judgement day coming for Christians as well as the lost. We will have to give an account of how we used the time and talents that God gave us. If you would rather have the applause of the reprobates on this board than the applause of God, that’s your choice. You are making all kinds of friends here, but you won’t be seeing them in eternity.
GOB, I didn’t condemn 72john to hell in that paragraph that you quoted. That would assume that I had the authority to pass sentence on his life. I don’t have that authority, but john does. The truth is that he has passed sentence of eternity in hell on himself by rejecting Christ. I’m just reporting what He himself has said.
Have you made that choice yourself Gob?
By Mara
February 22, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this
Whiley, are you an advocate of the death penalty as a method of revenge or as a safeguard for society? In the instance of revenge, certainly a bit of callousness is called for. What satisfaction is there to be had if you don’t think the monster is feeling excruciating pain? After all, he brutally beat someone to death with a hammer, so we should stoop to his level and make sure he goes out screaming. Same situation as with the Iraqi insurgents. “They cut peoples heads off, so why can’t we beat ‘em up and stack ‘em into naked pyramids?” If you are executing them to protect society, isn’t it in societies interest to maintain an modicum of compassion even for the worst of us? And no, I’m definitly NOT a religious nut. But I am a decent human being and causing needless suffering, even to a heinous murderer, is against my nature.
By Renee
February 22, 2006 10:15 AM | Link to this
ROFL JBM - too funny….
By Renee
February 22, 2006 10:19 AM | Link to this
JBM - is that what you are reading, The Homosexual Manifesto, girl pass that over here and get back to the Bible!!!
I’m just wondering how do you humanely kill someone.
By Gob
February 22, 2006 10:29 AM | Link to this
Chuck, to say you aren’t condemning because you don’t have the authority is nothing more than using semantics to justify your behavior. The spirit of what you are saying is no different that if you came straight out and said “I condemn you to hell.�
As for me, a Jewish rabbi that has been dead for 2000 years has no connection to anything that I deal with on a daily basis. I was raised in church, and even through most of college was pretty evangelical. Now, however, I am not arrogant enough to claim that I know what the Truth about spirituality is. Is there a God/creator/etc? Maybe so, but nothing I have seen or experience has proven it beyond a doubt to me.
The question that made me realize how arrogant I (and most other Christians) was was this: “If you read about a lost tribe whose religion was founded by people worshipping a zombie, and which the most important aspect is that of symbolic cannibalism, would you give it credibility?� We laugh at the things the Egyptians, Greeks, Indians, etc believed, but when broken down to the core, what Christians believe is no less crazy.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 10:30 AM | Link to this
“After all, he brutally beat someone to death with a hammer, so we should stoop to his level and make sure he goes out screaming. Same situation as with the Iraqi insurgents. “They cut peoples heads off, so why can’t we beat ‘em up and stack ‘em into naked pyramids?â€?
Exactly.
By Whiley
February 22, 2006 10:33 AM | Link to this
Mara , I believe that any person that is OK with beating someone else with a hammer, over & over with as much strength as they can give, not caring who their victim is, being so cold not to consider the family & friends that will also be affected, the money it will cost the taxpayers in solving the crime & going through a trial, is nothing more than a piece of SH!@#!@ that is lower than the scum that grows in a sewage pipe. Call it revenge, justice, whatever, just dissolve people like that from this world & don’t waste anytime doing it. Who cares if he’s a little uncomfortable when he’s executed. Otherwise, don’t use my hard earned money to pay their prison bills till the day they naturally die. Let the nutjob right to lifers flip that bill.
By Gob
February 22, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this
Jack, if we as society look for revenge this way, we lose all ability to claim the high moral ground, and then everything that extremists say about the US would be true. Also, that is quite a slippery slope to start down.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this
Mara,
If “Eye for an eye” were practiced, their would be a lot less crime. Don’t ya think?
By Whiley
February 22, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this
Gob, then who are the nutbags that are out there protesting against his execution? They make me sick. They sure do get organized & go to a lot of trouble for somebody that BEAT A YOUNG GIRL WITH A FRIGGIN HAMMER ! ! ! ! !A HAMMER ! ! ! A HAM-ERRRRRRRR ! SHE’S DEAD ! ! ! ! They should be protesting the violence of that crime. FLIPPIN MORONS.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this
Chuck:
Do not EVER, EVER call me “girl” again. You do not know me and we are not friends or siblings. I don’t give a flying fig what context it was in, or how comfortable you felt with me at the moment. YOU DON’T KNOW ME. Don’t call me “girl.”
Now, as for my response, all I really want to say is this:
The problem you’re encountering is that your god—at least, the way you present him—has zero appeal to anyone who doesn’t currently attend your church.
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
ZERO APPEAL
If your god truly IS a benevolent being—then you’re doing a p-iss poor job of representing him.
…but, I’ll speak for myself.
I can tell you what Jesus said to the Samaritan woman, but what is more important is what he didn’t say. Better yet, I think it’s a good time to ask you, what would YOU have said, Chuck?
You find this whorish (or homosexual - take your pick. I’m sure you’d love to confront a homosexual woman, so I’m giving you an option) woman at a well.
What do you say to her?
What Jesus said was enough to make her run and tell everyone about him. She was so excited to have had this experience that she couldn’t wait to go and tell of his power! That is the same effect we should have on people.
He was gentle and compassionate with her, to answer your question. He let her know that he knew about her past - and her present. He didn’t offer any harsh, judgmental words. He didn’t scold or scorn her. He didn’t mock or ridicule her. He didn’t tell her how nasty and immoral her sins were. He didn’t call her names to degrade or debaase her. He told her that she needed to choose whom she would worship because God is looking for true worshippers. He didn’t speak once of hellfire or try to scare her into living “right.” He knew she was a Samaritan, and by right as a Jew, he shouldn’t even be talking to her, much less ministering to her. But, he did anyway. He saw the opportunity to comfort a woman with deep issues and a lot of emotional baggage, and he made the best of that opportunity.
Do you think she’d be as eager to run and tell of His glory if He’d been harsh with her? Do you think she’d want to know more about Him and His father if He’d been hurtful to her?
Back to my question, Chuck. What would YOU have said to her?
Chuck: Lady, where’s your husband?
WOMAN: I have no husband.
Chuck: Girl, please. You have five husbands, and you’re working on another now. You know you’re heading straight to hell. God loves you and I love you and we love you so much that we want to warn you about this burning hell that all whores like yourself will burn in if you don’t turn from your wicked, nasty ways immediately and come to the kind and loving, God of judgment. It’s not natural or moral to be a slut. It’s disgusting. God doesn’t hate whores, he just hates whorish acts. Now, turn from your wicked ways at once and come with me to church where we can get you all cleaned up and converted and you can go and warn others about hell!! It’s not okay to be a whore, and it’s even worse to be a gay whore.
Awwww, don’t cry. There is hope for you. All you have to do is come to church with me. Jesus loves you and so do I, Tramp.
By Bruce
February 22, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this
I’m with you Jack and Whiley. In today’s world we can, probably in every case, prove without a doubt who did what to whom. If a person can be so callious to take a life needlessly, and it can be proved without a doubt they did it, then by all means bring back public hangings and let’s all watch them pay their debit to society. We could charge admission and help off set the cost of the investigations, trial and housing.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this
JBM. Watch that blood pressure! We don’t want to lose you.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this
It is NOT semantics. If you believe the Bible it is nothing more than reporting the facts. If I go to a courtroom and see a man plead guilty and be sentenced by the judge am I condemning him if I write an article reporting those facts in the paper? Of course not.
It is also decidedly not arrogant to claim to know the truth of spirituality. Again, it is nothing that is beyond ANY person’s capability if they have two things: A heart changed by God through repentence and acceptance of Christ as Savior and Lord AND the willingness to study God’s WORD. He didn’t put us here blind. He gave us an owner’s manual.
As for the difference between Christianity and ANY other religion, you should understand that it is a matter of both FAITH and EVIDENCE. If you are truly seeking to know the truth, I would suggest that you start with a book called Evidence That Demands A Verdict by Josh McDowell. As a lawyer he was asking himself the same kinds of questions that you are asking. Instead of sitting around waiting for some sort of revelation, he investigated it for himself. It really is a fascinating study.
By Mara
February 22, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this
Jack, Maybe less crime, but a lot more blind people.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 10:49 AM | Link to this
I will admit that my blood pressure does rise a bit when a white, male stranger calls me “girl.”
By Chilao
February 22, 2006 10:49 AM | Link to this
Like Jesus said the Mary Magdalene in the movie Last Temptation of Christ, as he put his hand in her crotch: “You have a treasure here and you are misusing it”. Apparently a wide group of people heard about that and came to the conclusion, without even having seen the movie, that Jesus was advocating whoredom. Blew me away when I saw the actual scene, compared to what I had read about it beforehand, due to all the protests.
that movie was made by a very devout Christian, Martin Scorsese. Maybe because he is Catholic? people objected? just a thought. LOL
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, haven’t we prophesied in your name? and in your name haven’t we cast out devils? and haven’t we, in your name, done many wonderful works?
And then I will say to them: depart from me, you worker of iniquity. I don’t know you. I’ve never known you.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this
If he was advocating it he wouldn’t have said the word misusing.
By Chilao
February 22, 2006 10:56 AM | Link to this
I think they ought to televise state-sponsored executions. Call it part of that Sunshine Law/Public’s Right-to-Know concept. Never understood why they are so private now but used to be public.
By Gob
February 22, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this
Chuck - To say you know with 100% certainty the truth about religion, which has been debated for thousands (and more likely hundreds of thousands of years), is absolutely arrogant. You are essentially saying that you are smarter and more spiritual and KNOW that what you believe is superior to what anyone else on earth believes. How is that not arrogant? You can’t say it is arrogant if what you believe is true, because in order to get to that point, you have to already KNOW you are right.
As for the bible being a set of facts…Is the bible literally true (in which case you can believe it is simply a reporting of facts) or is it full of metaphors (in which case it is most certainly NOT facts)?
Also, how do reconcile the bible being the actual word of god when there are letters attributed to Paul, that he in fact didn’t write (this is almost universally accepted by biblical scholars)? Would the true word of god contain forgeries? That seems unlikely to me.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this
39A lot of Samaritans in that town put their faith in Jesus because the woman had said, “This man told me everything I have ever done.” 40They came and asked him to stay in their town, and he stayed on for two days.
41Many more Samaritans put their faith in Jesus because of what they heard him say. 42They told the woman, "We no longer have faith in Jesus just because of what you told us. We have heard him ourselves, and we are certain that he is the Savior of the world!"Jesus told her EVERYTHING she had ever done. He reminded her of her SIN. What was He saving them FROM? Their SIN.
36After Jesus left the crowd and went inside, [c] his disciples came to him and said, “Explain to us the story about the weeds in the wheat field.” 37Jesus answered: The one who scattered the good seed is the Son of Man. 38The field is the world, and the good seeds are the people who belong to the kingdom. The weed seeds are those who belong to the evil one, 39and the one who scattered them is the devil. The harvest is the end of time, and angels are the ones who bring in the harvest.
40Weeds are gathered and burned. That's how it will be at the end of time. 41The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will gather from his kingdom everyone who does wrong or causes others to sin. 42Then he will throw them into a flaming furnace, where people will cry and grit their teeth in pain. 43But everyone who has done right will shine like the sun in their Father's kingdom. If you have ears, pay attention!By Whiley
February 22, 2006 11:04 AM | Link to this
I HATE it when anybody uses the term whore just because a female has sex. It’s JUST SEX, & MEN ARE DOING IT TOO ! BIG FLIPPIN FRIGGIN DEAL ! IF SEX WERE THAT IMPORTANT IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS THERE WOULDN’T BE SO MANY PEOPLE FAKING IT ! ! ! ! THERE’S NOTHING WRONG WITH IT ! WOMEN ARE NOT WHORES FOR HAVING SEX ! FREAKIN RELIGIOUS FREAKS !
Now shut up & stop arguing over biblical lies & mythical people. Do something better with your time like picking up all the trash off the entrance & exit ramps off 285.
Hey Jack !
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this
A little off the subject (well, I guess it’s never off the subject for Chuck), but here’s a very interesting article in today’s Yahoo! Health about some researchers who found a possible “gay gene” in mothers who have more than one gay son.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this
Chuck, it’s not what you say, it’s how you say it. Jesus knew that.
Whiley, to whom is your 11:04 directed?
By Brian Curtis
February 22, 2006 11:10 AM | Link to this
Gob and Mara have it right. If we punish crimes using the same tactics as the criminals—-or if we torture terrorist suspects who might have tortured people-—then what, exactly, are we punishing? Certainly not their actions, because we’re doing the exact same thing. No, in that case we’re just punishing the fact that THEY did it and WE didn’t.
The America I believe in is better than that. Revenge is not the same as justice.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this
Mara. A human can become acclimated to many things. jail is one of them. When someone has been in and out of jail several times, they become used to it. If the punishment for any crime is jail, when the career criminal gets out of jail, he is in heaven because he can do anything he wants until he gets caught. Murder, rape, robbery and all that will happen is he goes back to jail. Free food, medical care & sex. Too easy.
By Brian Curtis
February 22, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this
“There’s no conclusive proof that Chuck has raped and murdered any teenage girls-—not today, anyway.”
“Chuck was not arrested in today’s drug-bust sting, nor was it proven that he ate those babies with ketchup and relish.”
“Chuck is among those sinners who will surely burn in hell for his many evil deeds. Of course, some of those sinners may escape the eternal torment their sick, twisted lives undoubtedly deserve if they attend my favorite church and repent from their vile perversions.”
You’re okay with all that, right Chuck? Because after all, I’m just reporting the facts.
By Gob
February 22, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this
If we start to execute people by the means in which they killed someone, all we would doing is adding to the violence we are all exposed to on a daily basis. Does anyone really believe that increasing the level of violence in this country would result in a safer country(especially if the “good guys” are now doing acts just as bad as the murderer)? Also, who would actually carry out these executions? That would be quite a burden to carry dont you think?
By Jack
February 22, 2006 11:19 AM | Link to this
I like my babies with mustard and relish. But every now and then I get a craving for a slaw baby. Mmmmmmmm.
By Van
February 22, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this
Since no one else is staying on topic, why should I.
November 30, 2005, in the S.F Chronicle.
Dubai buys British P&O shipping line
Dubai, the upstart sheikdom of the United Arab Emirates, agreed Tuesday to purchase the storied British shipping company Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation for $5.7 billion, strengthening Dubai’s position as a center of commerce and transport.
P&O, as it is known, got its start in the 1830s carrying mail among Portugal, Spain and England, but it later expanded to ferry passengers and goods throughout the British Empire. The company now has operations in 100 global ports as well as a passenger ferry service in Europe and a real estate portfolio.
DP World, Dubai’s port company, is offering a 46 percent premium to P&O’s stock price on Oct. 27, the day before news of a possible bid became public. After the all-cash acquisition closes, DP World will be the third-largest port operator in the world, behind Hutchison Whampoa of Hong Kong and Temasek Holdings of Singapore.
— New York Times
By kimberly
February 22, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this
Women who like sex were deemed bad throughout history because men only want to provide support for the product of their OWN seed. If a woman likes sex, then a man might wind up taking care of a child not his own. And throughout history, reproduction within marriage wasn’t about the children as much as it was about property rights and inheritance. This is contradictory to the nature of our Supreme Creator who, MOST DEFINITELY ensured we would reproduce by giving us a deep aching desire that even the most pure of heart has to answer at some point. Would Jesus not have commanded the men in a village to love and protect ALL the children born there?
But the men thought it better to call the women WHORES, then humiliate and even stone them to death if they dare enjoy sex the same as a man. And they lose no sleep over a bastard child who goes hungry.
By Whiley
February 22, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this
Just Being Me, I’m directing that at any & all people that go ON & ON & ON with their boring, lame, ridiculous religious debates & arguments, the endless bible quoting & whore calling. The world would be a much better place if all religious folks stayed together in one country. Of course, they’d all end up blowing themselves up in the name of their religion. HA ! There’s the solution.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this
Gob. Ask that to the next of kin of victims of violent crime.
Good post Kim.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 11:29 AM | Link to this
Whiley, I found much of yesterday’s discussion to be quite lame and boring. But, since I realize that this is a PUBLIC BLOG, I accept that there may be discussions that hold no interest to me. You’ll do well to accept the same.
Furthermore, please do not tell me to “shut up.” That’s rude, and I don’t recall being rude to you, so that’s really unmerited.
It sounds like you have problems with the use of the word “whore”… well, as long as it’s not used to describe a woman who sleeps around with several different men. That’s personal. The term “whore” is a common term used to describe women and men who are promiscuous. It’s not directed to you, so if you don’t like it, ignore it or get over it.
The best advice I can give you for frequenting a blog is that if you don’t enjoy engaging in particular conversations, ignore it.
By True Confusion
February 22, 2006 11:29 AM | Link to this
From the Death Penalty Information Center: The death penalty is much more expensive than its closest alternative—life imprisonment with no parole.
Apparently, it’s something like 6 times more expensive for some states to execute than to keep them in jail.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this
And by the way, I don’t use I-285 so I’m not inclined to spend my time picking up trash there. But, it’s a great idea nonetheless. So, why don’t you log off and head on out there yourself, mmmkay?
By Whiley
February 22, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this
Just Being Me, I do realize that everyone has an opinion. I also realize this is a public blog. Doesn’t change the fact that I’m completely sick of hearing religious garbage in every single friggin subject. You can’t get away from it. The religious freaks have their hands in everything.
And let me make this clear to everyone. A WHORE is a person that sells their body for sex in exchange for money. NOT a woman who has more than one sex partner in her lifetime. The word whore may describe male or female, but lets not try to kid ourselves, it’s used as a derogatory term toward females who choose to have sex, and at times for what they wear. It’s ridiculous. I always point that out when anybody uses that word.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this
That’s cause they wait so friggin long to do it. Give them 30 days to make right with their maker and send them to the maker
By candide
February 22, 2006 11:45 AM | Link to this
It would be cheaper to execute than to keep in jail if they would simply execute in a cheap way: hanging or shooting, no other equipment needed.
By Van
February 22, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this
Whiley,
Are you saying we should be talking about people that blow themselves up for their religion? That sounds like the topic of this blog!
By Jack
February 22, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this
Isn’t it in Turkey when the execute someone they bill the family for the bullet?
By candide
February 22, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this
Don’t listen to anyone quoting the New Testament to you. It was written by frauds, cheats and lunatics.
By Whiley
February 22, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this
Just being me you can go to any highway, doesn’t have to be 285. I don’t have to because I use my time well. I don’t bother anyone else spouting quotes out of the bible, I don’t turn a perfectly good blog into a mind numbing boring to read Sunday school class. I don’t waste Sunday afternoons going door to door bothering strangers by asking them if they’ve found Jesus. I don’t waste money on paper & copy machine toner on religious brochures that nobody wants to read anyway.
What I was TRYING to say was that I wish the people that DO that sort of thing do something else more constructive instead. It’s doesn’t have to be picking up trash, although there are some places that need it badly.
:) (P.S. sorry that I said shut up, what I should have said was would you PLEASE shut up)
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this
Jack, do you have any idea how many innocent men (perhaps women, too, but I’m not sure) would have been executed if convicts only stayed on death row for 30 days before their execution?
Whiley, you’re entitled to your opinion, and your feelings of frustration. Just like everyone here is entitled to express their opinions, too. Whether you like hearing about them or not.
By kimberly
February 22, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this
My problem with the death penalty is not that it helps people out of this world who helped others out first, but that our “justice” system too often convicts the innocent. How often do we read that a wrongly-convicted, newly-exonerated person has jut been released after losing 20 precious years of life to a cinder-block hell? Prosecutors don’t seem to really CARE about the truth; their jobs and reputations rely on convictions, and we all know those who defend the poor often don’t care either.
On the other hand, Timothy McVeigh only did, what? Five years? Six years in the cinder-block hell? For all the pain he caused? Where’s his punishment?
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 12:01 PM | Link to this
Whiley, if I wasn’t trying to be like Christ, I would tell you to lick the crack of my behind on an August day after I woke up and decided to take a run before taking a shower.
But, I won’t tell you that because it just wouldn’t be right.
And, I don’t have to clean on any highway because I take MARTA to and from work, and my child takes MARTA to and from school. We pay a fare, so we’re even. For the record, I got your point, but was wondering who the heck you thought you were to tell someone what they should and shouldn’t do with their time?
FOR THE LAST TIME, if it’s mind-numbingly boring, skip it.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this
Right on, Kimberly.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this
Remember the Alday killings? They killed 5 or 6 members of the same family & took turns raping the females before they killed them and this guy is still on death row after more than 30 years. Does that make sense? Tookie was on death row how long? If we remove them from the gene pool, they won’t be repeat offenders. Let Satan have them.
By Jewish and Proud of It
February 22, 2006 12:08 PM | Link to this
Whiley, if I wasn’t trying to be like Christ, I would tell you to lick the crack of my behind on an August day after I woke up and decided to take a run before taking a shower.
hehe, you said crack…
By Whiley
February 22, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this
Kimberly, as I said before, thank GOODNESS DNA research is so advanced now.
With that in mind, what if DNA research was protested against by the religious nuts?? What if they were never given the chance to advance the science of DNA due to religious freaks? That’s something to consider the next time your bible beater representatives vote against it.
By Whiley
February 22, 2006 12:11 PM | Link to this
Chuck, currently it’s not boring because nobody is typing endless boring bible quotes. Uh oh, here it comes ! lol
By kimberly
February 22, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this
Remembering the Alday killings only reminds me that there really is NO hope because people suck and our Creator has most likely abandoned us completely, with good reason.
By Whiley
February 22, 2006 12:20 PM | Link to this
And just being me, know what all those anti death penalty loons protesting in California should be doing with their time? How about keeping guard at public parks or at school bus stops on the look out for gangs & pervs. Or how about looking after people that have to take the bus after dark & being dropped off at a secluded stop. Escort them through their walk home alone. There’s so many other better things to do than waste time spouting off the bible & defending scum.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 12:21 PM | Link to this
Or maybe we could talk about this fascinating topic that you brought up in a previous blog:
*By Whiley
December 27, 2005 02:10 PM | Link to this
BTW I love Oprah. Not every single show she has, but who can keep everybody’s attention constantly? She does a lot for other people & has been entertaining us for years. Oprah has brought up topics society loves to keep quiet about & has interviewed so many interesting people. The book of the month thing was a brilliant idea. She also discovered Dr. Phil. Say what you want about him, nick pick him all apart,you can’t deny his shows are entertaining & helpful.*
Yes your time is so well spent. Not that I’m not enjoying the cat fight between you and my girl JBM, but you are starting to sound a little silly.
By Whiley
February 22, 2006 12:22 PM | Link to this
Jewish and Proud of It , THAT WAS THE FUNNIEST ANSWER ! LOL I’m going to start responding that way. lol !
By chuck
February 22, 2006 12:24 PM | Link to this
Yes Wiley. I would hate to waste my time talking about eternity when I could be discussing the fascinating topic that you brought up in a previous blog:
*By Whiley
December 27, 2005 02:10 PM | Link to this
BTW I love Oprah. Not every single show she has, but who can keep everybody’s attention constantly? She does a lot for other people & has been entertaining us for years. Oprah has brought up topics society loves to keep quiet about & has interviewed so many interesting people. The book of the month thing was a brilliant idea. She also discovered Dr. Phil. Say what you want about him, nick pick him all apart,you can’t deny his shows are entertaining & helpful.*
As much as I’m enjoying the catfight between you and my girl JBM, you are starting to sound a little bit silly.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this
Is it just me or is something scwewy going on here with the posts?
By Mara
February 22, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this
I have to admit that I’m a bit ambivilent on the death penalty. If there is clear-cut evidence (DNA, audio/video, etc) that the accused did the crime, I’ve no problem with it. Unfortunately, eye-witness testimony or plea bargian testimony is often used as corroboration to circumstantial evidence. As we have seen, this can (and has) led to the conviction of innocent people. I’m not arguing for or against the death penalty in and of itself, but I do think that causing needless pain is abhorrent. If society needs to kill them, whether for vengence or to protect themselve, it elevates us to do it compassionately. It demeans us to take pleasure in the pain of others, even if those others have done truly heinous things.
By Bruce
February 22, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this
“How often do we read that a wrongly-convicted, newly-exonerated person has jut been released after losing 20 precious years of life to a cinder-block hell?”
You apparently have no concept of what life is like inside a Georgia prison. Color TV, weight rooms, pool tables, private sleeping quarters, 3 meals a day, all the medical and dental needs, plus many, many more FREE emtitlments that most hard working law abidding folks don’t get. The funny part is they get all that and more and never, ever have to lift a finger to get it. Pure HELL I tell ya.
By kimberly
February 22, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this
So how long were you in the joint, Bruce?
By Brian Curtis
February 22, 2006 01:06 PM | Link to this
I’m not ambivalent on the death penalty at all.
Regardless of what the convict has done and the degree of certainty of his/her guilt… there’s no WAY I want to give the government power to take someone’s life. They don’t deserve that power and can’t be trusted to use it responsibly.
By Gob
February 22, 2006 01:12 PM | Link to this
Bruce,
Sounds like you should do something to get arrestedand take a little vacation in pokey. I mean, 3 meals a day and TV?? What isnt to love?
By Jack
February 22, 2006 01:13 PM | Link to this
Chuck. Pretty lame looking up one of Whiley’s posts from December. Gee, hate to see what you have on me.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 01:22 PM | Link to this
Well Jack if you are going to spout off about how important what YOU talk about is and then trash everbody else, you should expect it. It took about 2 minutes to find and it apparently shut her up for a little while…and I don’t mean PLEASE.
By candide
February 22, 2006 01:26 PM | Link to this
The God of War has risen! The civil war is now out in the open in Iraq between Shiites and Sunnis. Bush thinks we have done well there, well he also thinks Arabs are good port security personnel. We will now need to get out of Iraq and let those religious nuts kill one another. Too bad there aren’t more evangelical Christians in Iraq: they would get theirs as well.
By candide
February 22, 2006 01:27 PM | Link to this
Christian like Chuck tend to forget that the gods were mostly prized as gods of war. It is war that is wanted, the origin of religion. And the believers kill like their god. God is on their side.
By Mara
February 22, 2006 01:29 PM | Link to this
Bruce, if you get private sleeping accomadations in prison, why do we hear so much about overcrowding? Are they lying about that? Way I hear it, Fulton county alone is well over 200 inmates above their maximum capacity. But don’t let the truth hurt a good story. I’ll help you out. Along with your fantasy “prisonlife of leasure”, you get the delightful anticipation of being raped, perhaps even gang-raped. You get to eat all that delicious and healthy jail food. You are allowed to shower with your friends. EGAD! I best run out and commit a crime right away!
By Jack
February 22, 2006 01:38 PM | Link to this
Still lame Chuck. Don’t have enough to do? Her opinions are just as important as yours, mine or your favorite 72John.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 01:40 PM | Link to this
Oh, and BITE ME Chuck.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 01:47 PM | Link to this
Didn’t say they weren’t Jack, but SHE said that about mine. The thing is Jack, I have a pretty good memory. When she came out as if she was the only serious minded person worthy of HAVING an opinion, I knew that I remembered her talking about, shall we say, less weighty topics and called her on it.
I don’t think that it is “lame” to fight hypocrisy.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this
If I’m ever near your bridge I’ll let my dog do the honors. He’s had his shots.
By kimberly
February 22, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this
My dog can kick your dog’s a—.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this
I’ve had my shots too.
By Chilao
February 22, 2006 02:10 PM | Link to this
December 27th? my my
how ‘bout dem Braves, anyhow?
By Whiley
February 22, 2006 02:12 PM | Link to this
Chuck what are you talking about? I’ve never said I’m the only only one that should have an opinion. I’m not a professional blogger so I don’t always get my point across without offending the bible beaters.
Hey there Jack I’ll bite cha.
By Renee
February 22, 2006 02:14 PM | Link to this
the hostility on this board today….in the infamous words of Rodney King
“can’t we all just get along?”
By chuck
February 22, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this
Besides Jack…I couldn’t leter mess with my GIRL JBM. That’s MY JOB.
By Scalia
February 22, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this
So JBM, what did your Jesus say to the woman at the well? “Hey girlfriend, that slut thing is fine with me…and hey, if you want to throw in a girlfriend on the side go for it. After all, sexual pleasure is much more important than a life of self-denial and thinking of others.�
This has got to be the funniest thing I’ve read all day. Slut thing? HAHAHAHA!!!
As for the Prince Albert, I was just fooling around with Zack’s nonsense about all of the piercings, dyed hair, and tattoos.
Besides, it would take a shotgun to pierce the boa constrictor.
By Zack
February 22, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this
Boscoe—You mean Norman’s back? I’ve simply glanced over some of the posts this week and have added a few of my own. I’m not surprised by anything bigoted that that broad-minded, gullible, in-denial, naive, childish man would say. Did I mention that he also likes to throw in racist comments? The latter are bad enough, but his comments against Christians are beyond bad. I’ve seen bumper stickers that reflect the speech from Norman’s mouth, and honestly, anyone who would display such a sticker deserves to be punched in the face.
What’s that? I’m wrong for saying that. Not at all. There are certain comments that just don’t get said. You don’t call a black man the “n” word. You don’t call a man’s wife a cuss word. You don’t make light of how Christians were treated historically.
One last thing about Norman: The guy has spoken many times about how everyone has a fear of getting ridiculed. Well, manybe insecure people like him anyway. I’m sorry, Norman, if people were hard on you verbally in the past. If you’re still bitter, confront them. Don’t express your bitterness the way you do today.
As I said yesterday, in response to a young lady’s belief that congress has no right to tell a woman what to do with “her” body, please understand that a baby inside her womb is his own body, NOT HERS! No one has the right to have an abortion.
I was unpleasantly surprised recently when I had a conversation with a girl I thought was a Christian who said she was pro-choice. She said she wasn’t pro-choice “all the time” and said that war was far worse than abortion. I quickly told her she was wrong and that there were just and unjust wars. It just offends me greatly how pro-choice people claim to be Christians.
Brian Curtis—You’ve probably had a verbal tirade against me between yesterday and today. I’ll scroll back and read it when I have more time. In the meantime, please take what I said yesterday to heart.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this
Chuck, is there a valid reason (you know, one that your God would approve of) that you are calling me by a term that I’ve (a) already informed you was offensive to me, and (b) asked you to stop calling me?
By Jack
February 22, 2006 02:31 PM | Link to this
JBM has been riled up today!
Renee’. What? You’re not having fun?
Whiley. :)
By Renee
February 22, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this
He was trying to be funny or sarcastic.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 02:36 PM | Link to this
I wasn’t offended Whiley…but when you say something like:
Now shut up & stop arguing over biblical lies & mythical people. Do something better with your time like picking up all the trash off the entrance & exit ramps off 285.
Expect to be challenged. Just about every topic you come in with your little line of z’s followed by a statement of how bored you are, but I don’t see many people trying to engage you in the topics that you bring up. Shouldn’t that tell you something?
There are hundreds of thousands of blogs on the internet. If you don’t like this one FIND ANOTHER ONE. Apparently you have so many better things to like watching Oprah and Dr. Phil. Hey, maybe they have blogs on their web sites. You’ll probably find lots men haters on those sites to commisurate with.
By kimberly
February 22, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this
JBM, are you referring to him calling you HIS girl? On a scale of 1 to 10, how creepy IS that? Do you want to borrow my dog?
By Chilao
February 22, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this
in the infamous words of Rodney King “can’t we all just get along?�
but it was better said by the geeky guy in the Pebbles Brothers’ movie Posse (as the bullets fly and he hides behind some chicken wire) LOL
By Bruce
February 22, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this
Sorry Mara, if you want to believe what you have seen on TV go ahead. I used to work at one of GA. Maximum Security prisons.
County JAIL is much different than State Prison. In the State Prison I worked in each inmate has their OWN room, with the OWN bed and a LOCK on their OWN door. And in some areas these same inmates have their OWN key to their OWN door. NO work is required, however if one wants they can work, MOST DON”T. They have individual showers stalls, with 8 ” concrete block walls (nicely painted) that seperate each stall, not group type showers.
They have internet with email, telephones, visitation. Heck I know several that have used the Law Library to become lawyers at our expense. There is no disconnection with the outside world in prisons these days. These folks are not removed from soceity because we pay for soceity to come to them.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this
NO JBM, you didn’t ASK me to stop calling you that. I believe your quote was:
Chuck:
Do not EVER, EVER call me “girl� again. You do not know me and we are not friends or siblings. I don’t give a flying fig what context it was in, or how comfortable you felt with me at the moment. YOU DON’T KNOW ME. Don’t call me “girl.�
Last time I looked, I’m not your Lackey. MY WIFE doesn’t TELL ME WHAT TO DO, so I don’t think I’ll let you tell me what to do either, girl. Had you asked me not to I would have abided by your wishes. It was not meant in a derogatory way initially.
If I were you I’d be more upset about the fact that you have NO ANSWER for the substance of the post.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this
Kimberly, I’m actually referring to him calling me “girl,” period, whether his or someone else’s doesn’t really matter to me. I just don’t appreciate being called “girl” by someone who doesn’t know me, and is a white male. It’s highly offensive and derogatory.
And, if someone asked me who would be more likely to intentionally offend a person, Jesus Christ or satan… I’d guess satan.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 02:47 PM | Link to this
Bruce, and next you’re going to tell us that Emeril was this prison’s head chef.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this
GO BRUCE!!!
Mara just got spanked!
By Jack
February 22, 2006 02:50 PM | Link to this
OK. Should Brian Nichols be put to death? We all know he is guilty of killing 4 people.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this
BTW jbm, what’s the deal with the “white male” crap. What difference does that make? Are you a, gasp, bigot?
By Gob
February 22, 2006 02:55 PM | Link to this
Bruce,
The question remains: if prison is so easy and from the way you tell it a pretty good life, why are you wasting your time trying to earn an honest living? Wouldnt it be much simpler to get arrested (heck you could even go for a white-collar crime and maybe grab some extra cash in the process) and take that vacation?
Maybe you and Chuck could be cellmates, seeing as he seems to have the same opinion of prison that you do.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 02:57 PM | Link to this
Gotta ask. JBM, what if Chuck was a black male? Would that have made it different?
By Renee
February 22, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this
You don’t understand how a white man calling a black woman or male, “girl” or “boy” respectively would be derogatory?? It’s kind of like calling a gay man a f**, or it’s almost just as bad as just saying the N word.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 03:01 PM | Link to this
Yes Jack. Brian Nichols should be put to death for his crimes.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 03:01 PM | Link to this
Hi Kim. :)
By Renee
February 22, 2006 03:03 PM | Link to this
Brian Nichols put to death??? Wouldn’t solve anything, but on the other hand he committed horrific crimes. We shouldn’t be paying any tax payer dollars for him to live it up in prison though.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this
Let’s see Gob, They’re INCARCERATED for acts against ALL OF US, and you want them to have AC, cable and a game room, whie an 86 year old lady is paying her state taxes to keep those guys in comfort and having her gas shut off because she can’t pay a $900.00 gas bill to keep her house warm. Makes sense to me. Prison ought to be more like ANDERSONVILLE and less like the Hilton.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 03:09 PM | Link to this
I don’t buy that Renee’. So if I say,”You go girl”, that is offensive to black females? If what Chuck said was offensive, it should have been the same whatever color his skin is.
By Sanhan
February 22, 2006 03:12 PM | Link to this
“This man told me everything I have ever done.â€?
Just a thought that “everything” includes the good things the woman did that didn’t involve sin. It’s possible that sometimes we do good things and don’t know that we have helped other, and thus never know how we could have helped more. I call that a sin, too.
Van, thanks for that info. Yeah, this story was downplayed for a while. I have heard that Snow, the Secretary of the Treasury has ties to the port management in the past, as ha the Carlyle group. I have also heard by a national security expert (can’t recall his name) that there is nothing to fear with DP taking over management in terms of infiltrating terrorists, but that overall port security is pathetic. The amount that is spent annually for checking containers in the ports is what is spent just about weekly in Iraq… I think this is a multilayered story; the recent news is just the tip of the iceberg. I also think that the top Republicans blocking this transaction are going to use this story to put some distance between them and Bush, as his support is not all that favorable,
If only they put as much energy in protecting the Bill of Rights as they do in their re-elections and self-interest.
Brian Curtis- I agree wholeheartedly that the government should not be able to determine anyone’s death, whether criminal, terminally ill, or even terminally ill criminal.
As far as acts of barbarity, they make us all too tolerant of more barbarity and desensitize us to the point where we create more atrocities to end atrocities.
Did anyone watch Frontline last night?
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this
NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING else to say to Chuck. That 2:45 was over the top. And, like I said, offending someone intentionally is unquestionably more like satan than it is like Christ. NOTHING else to say to him. Not now. Not ever. Mark my words.
Jack, to answer your question, it would have been VERY different if Chuck was a black male, although I still wouldn’t like it. It just wouldn’t have been as offensive. A white man calling a black woman a “girl” is highly offensive to ANY black woman, and to black people in general (even black men would find that highly offensive), and has a sting just like the n- word.
I apologize for using the word “offensive” so many times, but right now I’m so incensed and so focused on not getting ugly that I can’t think of any other word.
It’s disgustingly offensive and I am so mortified to find that sort of offensive behavior coming from someone who insists he follows Christ.
I’ve been trying not to say this for a while now, simply because I didn’t want to offend, but Chuck does nothing but sow seeds of discord. He IS satan in the flesh.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 03:16 PM | Link to this
Jack, no offense dear, but you don’t have to “buy” it. As a white man, I don’t expect you to know what a black woman finds offensive. And, as I always say, feelings don’t have to be justified. There are no right or wrong feelings. I don’t know of a single black woman who is not highly offended by some white stranger calling her “girl.” And, if you don’t get it, too darn bad.
By Renee
February 22, 2006 03:17 PM | Link to this
The comment “you go girl” is in a different connotation (sp?) than saying “girl” in a conversation when speaking with someone.
By Gob
February 22, 2006 03:18 PM | Link to this
Chuck - that is quite a misrepresentation of what i said. I havent advocated making prison easy, which I dont believe it currently is. I am simply questioning Bruce’s contention that prison is almost like a free vacation.
One thing to keep in mind, however, is the number of people in prison on simple drug possesion charges. Should those people be subjected to the same punishment as rapists and murderers? The drug laws are putting an awful lot of non-violent people in an incredibly violent place.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 03:18 PM | Link to this
And Renee, it IS as bad as calling a black person the “n” word. It has the same derogatory connotation with the same degrading meaning. It’s demeaning and condescending, even when you “didn’t mean it like that.”
By chuck
February 22, 2006 03:18 PM | Link to this
I have never in my life heard that it was offensive to black femailes to be called “girl”. I of course know the connotation of the word “boy” and black males but had NEVER heard that the other was equivalent.
I’ve used that term with both black and white female teachers at my school and have never been told that it was a problem, and trust me, they wouldn’t hesitate to tell me if it was a problem. I personally think that ya’ll are finding way to much to take offense to and just made that up. Just my opinion.
By kimberly
February 22, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this
JBM, Chuck once called me a “depraved little miscreant.” (Miscreant: noun, one who behaves criminally or viciously) It was either shortly before or after he stated that my parents should have aborted ME. But I don’t have the time that he does to dig through blog files past to dig up the exact conversation. I thought, “Finally, a nice Christian man to talk to!”
By Renee
February 22, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this
I think JBM’s initial response was due to the fact that he was using “girl” in the context of knowing her.
When people are cool with you and have a relationship with you and they say
“Girl, look at this” or “girl, listen to this” it’s okay.
But when someone who you are not cool with coupled with the fact that they are white, it can be construed as derogatory. Then it comes across as.
“GIRL, look at this”. “GIRL, come here”.
While, Chuck may or may not have meant to be derogatory the initial time he said it, he definitely was the second time, and said it purely to p-i-s-s JBM off, which obviously he succeeded in that goal.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this
I’m sorry but I cannot see how girl can be as offensive as the “n” word. I haven’t heard a black man called “boy” in a VERY long time. Girl was not used in the same context as boy would be.
By chuck
February 22, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this
My brother used to be a cop, Gob. He was at the precint desk one day when a bank around the corner was robbed. There were cops everywhere looking for the guy when he walked in and surrendered to my brother. He said, and I quote: “The federal prisons have better dental care.”
When I was going to school I couldn’t even afford dental care and this guy is getting me to PAY for his.
By Mary Magdalen
February 22, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this
Oh Chuck so YOUR WIFE DOES NOT TELL YOU WHAT TO DO! Well, big ole boy I’m NOT SURPRISED. I bet she’s one of those meek little women who would not think of telling a man what to do; nobody with any sense or spirit or self esteem would be married to you. You know, the kind that tucks her tail between her legs and hangs her head when you’re not pleased. The kind who jumps when you say jump. You are a mean s-o-b underneath that fake christer mask, boy! I’m glad my husband is not like you!
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 03:30 PM | Link to this
Pardon the stereotype, but most men who use the term “girl” when addressing a woman are gay, whether they admit it or not.
By Renee
February 22, 2006 03:30 PM | Link to this
I’ve used that term with both black and white female teachers at my school and have never been told that it was a problem, and trust me, they wouldn’t hesitate to tell me if it was a problem. I personally think that ya’ll are finding way to much to take offense to and just made that up. Just my opinion.
Made that up?? Yes, I just pulled that out of my behind for the sake of arguing. First of all, you weren’t speaking to me originally, so you didn’t offend me any more than you usually do with your daily rantings of sinners etc. But if you think that is not derrogatory, test it out. Go to a black woman that you don’t know and ask her “Girl, do you know what time it is?” or “Girl, I need some directions” or say “Girl, you need Jesus”. Go ahead, since I made it up. Go to College Park or Decatur and say it to random black women and report your findings tomorrow.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this
“I have never in my life heard that it was offensive to black femailes to be called “girlâ€?. I of course know the connotation of the word “boyâ€? and black males but had NEVER heard that the other was equivalent.”
Ditto.
By Mara
February 22, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this
Bruce, I don’t have to see it on TV. I’ve known enough people who’ve spent time in prison to know the tales by heart. I (pure-as-snow princess that I am) have never been incarcerated, but my sister has. I’d tell you her story but it’s not mine to bandy about the ‘net. Suffice it to say that she wasn’t laying about eating bonbons and watching her free color T.V. There wasn’t room for laying about with the three other people she shared her cell with. Frankly, I should call “bull-s**” on your claims to have worked in a prison, let alone a maximum security prison. To give you the benefit of a doubt regarding your employment, it’s possible that you got to work at Club Fed, guarding folks who rub elbows with Ken Lay and Dick Cheney. The poor people don’t get to go to those. My sister was in a real prison, with real criminals who really did assault, blackmail, and intimidate other prisoners. And no, they didn’t get to decide when they were locked down.
And chuck, what’s this with the spanking? Oh, I forgot…christian…
By Chilao
February 22, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this
I have always thought the word ‘girl’(distinct from ‘you go, girl’) was a term black women used among themselves and would never consider using it since it connotes a familiarity that would be non-existent from me, even if I knew them well. However, I have an adopted sister, mixed-blood, who uses it with her girlfriends of any race. anyway, I think it a term women use.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this
Kimberly, makes you wanna run to church and get “saved” huh? And, you don’t have to dig through the files because I remember it clearly.
By Sanhan
February 22, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this
Actually, many feminists cringe when as adults they are called a girl, especially by a man to whom they are not close. Unless it’s Bruce Springsteen doing the calling… “Wrap your legs round these velvet rims and strap your hands across my engines… and someday girl, I don’t know when, we’re gonna get to that place where we really want to go,” like perhaps a blog where false dichotomies, strawmen, and religious zealots don’t exist.
Springsteen can call me a girl, just as long as he calls me… But nobody else better try it.
By Renee
February 22, 2006 03:34 PM | Link to this
Jack - fortunately you seem to have more class than to use the word “boy” but I can assure you, up until the time I moved from GA, I heard it in both DeKalb and Gwinnett, most recently from a police officer who used it when myself and a male were pulled over for speeding. Trust me it’s used quite rampidly in Georgia, girl and boy in the same context.
By lozen
February 22, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
Yeah, chuck’s dark side is “OUT” lately. The christer image is fading fast. Zack, childbirth by choice, not by force! No woman should ever be forced to have a child she does not want. That is biological slavery, ignoranus.
By Gob
February 22, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
So would you prefer that the US prison system return to the age of dungeons? What, in your opinion, are the conditions in which a prisoner should live(and remember, drug possesion and murder are often time in the same facility, so your punishment needs to be the same for all)?
By Jack
February 22, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this
I will remember that. After all, Hell hath no fury…
By Chilao
February 22, 2006 03:38 PM | Link to this
Pardon the stereotype, but most men who use the term “girl� when addressing a woman are gay, whether they admit it or not
exactly! Only guys I have heard use it as well.
By Bruce
February 22, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this
Gob, I can agree that non-violent crimmals do not need to be housed with the violent ones. But I must ask when was the last time you have seen the inner working of a State Prison? Have you ever wondered how inmates that have no family support get money to spend at the inmate store? They use things like internet and telephones to place personal ads in newpapers and on internet websites to con people out of their money.
Inmates in today’s Ga State Prisons have all these things and more at our (taxpayers) expense. In the prison were I worked TV and lights went out at 11:00PM. If a sporting event, or any special event, aired past the lights out time the inmates were allowed to keep the TV’s on and watch them, no matter what.
If one inmate gets mad and breaks a TV, on purpose, we (the taxpayers) buy them a new one. Does the inmate work off the cost of the TV, NOPE. We just buy a new one and he gets to break it again when he gets mad.
By Gob
February 22, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this
Chuck, do you think the US prison system should return to the days of dungeons?
What, in your opinion, is appropriate for a prisoner to have when they are incarcerated? And keep in mind that petty drug offenders are often in the same facility with rapists and murderers.
By Chilao
February 22, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this
A girlfriend of many years really like that Springsteen song, “heh little girl is your daddy gone, as he gone away and left you all alone?” or something like that. LOL
she could sing it real well.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this
Okay, Jack, since I generally like you, I’m going to go a little deeper into this with you.
You understand that it’s derogatory to call a black man “boy,” right? Okay. Think about why that is. It is pretty much because pre- and during- the Civil Rights movement (and obviously during slavery), it was common for white people to address black men as “boy.” It was usually said in this context:
“Boy, this here fountain’s for whites only,” or “Boy, bring me that there paper,” or “Boy, com’mere,” or “Boy, don’t you eyeball a white woman.”
I guess millennium white men have forgotten that those same people would address black women as “girl” (pronounced “gayl”).
“Hey there gayl, brang me a glass a water,” or “Hey gayl, whatchu lookin at,” or “Hey gayl, who’s yo mammy?” or “Hey gayl, listen here…”
It is EQUALLY rude and derogatory to black men and women. And, whether you knew it before or not, you know it now. It is just as disgusting to call a black man “boy” as it is to call a black woman “girl” and for the very same reasons.
Not to mention, I stopped being a girl when I got my period.
By kimberly
February 22, 2006 03:42 PM | Link to this
Oh no, man, Springsteen needs to call ME!
By Renee
February 22, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this
Actually Jack it’s unfortunate that things today being said innocently are not taken as so, because over the years they haven’t been used innocently.
By Bruce
February 22, 2006 03:46 PM | Link to this
OK Mara I’ll believe you have a sister that was in prison if you believe I worked at one. See how that works I can call BS too.
Sounds like you need new friends if you know so many that have spent time in prison.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 03:50 PM | Link to this
Chilao, you raise a good point, and you’ll note that when I first raised this issue with satan, I told him that I did not wish to be called “girl” by *him” since he doesn’t know me and we are neither friends nor relatives.
I referred to the lack of familiarity in my original post, and again in response to satan’s rudeness.
I do not solely take issue with the fact that he is white and called me “girl,” but also with the fact that he does not know me. It would have been completely different if he knew me, or if we were friends.
He was being meanspirited, just like he always is. Just like his daddy.
And, I’ll say it again: MOST GUYS THAT CALL THEIR COWORKERS “GIRL” ARE GAY, GAY, GAY, GAY, GAY, GAY, GAY, GAY, GAY, GAY, GAY, GAY, GAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By kimberly
February 22, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this
The prison discussion began with the acknowledgement that INNOCENT people do get convicted. Bruce was the one who came in with “OH, like that’s such a bad thing?” (paraphrased) HELLO? Doesn’t matter how nice it is if you’re stripped of your liberty, privacy, loved ones, and everything that makes it YOUR life, and you’re innocent! Unless you’re well-connected or filthy rich, our justice system is a total crap shoot.
By Mara
February 22, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this
Bruce, are you saying that anyone who’s ever been to prison doesn’t deserve to have friends? Do you think that criminals only hang out with other criminals? I don’t need new friends, I enjoy helping the ones I have find a new life outside of jail. I’d be willing to bet that everyone on this forum has at least one friend or aquaintance who’s been in trouble with the law. You’re a dumb a*. and I’m outta here. C-ya all later.
By Renee
February 22, 2006 04:02 PM | Link to this
ROFL @ “raised this issue with Satan”.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 04:22 PM | Link to this
I also think that non-violent offenders should not be incarcerated unless they prayed on the elderly. Then they should be flogged.
By kimberly
February 22, 2006 04:27 PM | Link to this
Jack, unfortunately, some people like that sort of thing.
By RF
February 22, 2006 04:33 PM | Link to this
Now it’s official. Chuck you are a snob, a hypocrite, and totally insane. That you would continue to call someone a name you have been told not to call her shows what an arrogant, disrespectful, condescending fool you are. Where in the Bible does it say it’s okay to call someone any name you wish? Where does the Bible justify arrogance and sexism?? Huh? Come on, tell me how your behavior towards JBM is justified in the Bible? You may treat your wife any way you wish, and I am quite sure she doesn’t tell you what to do. Just smack her if she does, right?
You have continually made my decision to NEVER enter a baptist church again all the more concrete. I can’t believe you are allowed to continue spouting your arrogant crap and haven’t been ‘called home’. Your continued misrepresentation of God isn’t going unnoticed. Go home and pray and let us know what he says about your behavior today. I’ll be interested to hear if God says it’s okay.
I’m embarrassed to say I believe in God after the way you have behaved.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 04:39 PM | Link to this
Kim. Depends on who does it to whom.
By Jack
February 22, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this
Chucks done good today. Toboga would be proud.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 04:50 PM | Link to this
Don’t be embarassed to say you believe in God, RF. Chuck doesn’t follow God, he follows satan. He is in no way a Christian, and he’s certainly not a Christ-follower. I know heathens that are more compassionate than that devil-worshipping demon.
Renee just reminded me that the devil can quote scripture just as well as anyone else can. Chuck (aka satan) is just a demon in Christians clothing.
By Just Being Me
February 22, 2006 04:51 PM | Link to this
I’m sure Chuck’s daddy is real proud, too. satan loves it when his children carry out their daily assignments.
By Randy
February 22, 2006 04:58 PM | Link to this
I here congradulations are in order. Candide(Norman Ravitch) has been released from the mental hospital, congradulations Norman. Although with some of these posts, it must have been to early. You sound just as LOONEY as ever. Boy you are truly nuts!!!
By Chilao
February 22, 2006 05:00 PM | Link to this
I thought it was Beelzebub?
what a name, though. LOL
By FatMoose
February 22, 2006 05:08 PM | Link to this
Chuck doesn’t follow God, he follows satan. He is in no way a Christian, and he’s certainly not a Christ-follower. I know heathens that are more compassionate than that devil-worshipping demon.
Renee just reminded me that the devil can quote scripture just as well as anyone else can. Chuck (aka satan) is just a demon in Christians clothing.
I have been thinking for a while: the bible serves both camps - one looks at it through a love colored pane, and the other a angry/suppressive one.
It state so in the bible that you have to watch for false witnesses and people that use it for selfish reasons. Unfortunately, most people think that as long as they are in a “bible camp” they are doing good works - but it isnt that simple. The bible states that as well - so there is not any excuse for them either: As god says; you have a choice: To Think or Not Think.
By chuck
February 23, 2006 08:06 AM | Link to this
Well, well, well. Another one bites the dust. JBM you are such a whiny little snot. Why don’t you place your anger where it should be…yourself. I know the fact that you couldn’t keep your man depressed you and you switched teams. That’s no reason for you to become a man hater like Whiley and Kimmie. I thought we had it goin on girl.
Seriously though, is this what we should expect from now on? Do we have to get approval for everything we say from the HOLY, HOLY, HOLY Saint JBM? You are so full of yourself. I have to say though, you are so consistently self-rightous that I am sure you will be nominated for sainthood any moment.
It is just so much fun getting all the homo-wners in such a snit everday. Thank you once again for proving that homosexuality IS IN FACT a mental disease.
By Brian Curtis
February 23, 2006 08:12 AM | Link to this
Well folks, we’ve gotten Chuck to show his true colors and revert to the childish state his brain truly occupies. Since his “contributions” are now at troll level, I suggest he be treated as such so we can move on to more productive discussions.
Some brains are just too damaged to be helped, and Chuck’s just going to have to wallow in his own bitterness and rage forever; surely that’s punishment enough for the fool?
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 08:19 AM | Link to this
I’d much rather be gay than evil. Go to hell demon.
By Renee
February 23, 2006 08:30 AM | Link to this
Brian, I agree with you 200%!
By candide
February 23, 2006 08:42 AM | Link to this
Chuck: obviously for a man one hole is as good as another, objectively speaking that is.
By Bruce
February 23, 2006 09:07 AM | Link to this
Chuck, As a Christain I must ask that you not only stop this childish behavior but I truely believe an apology, to this entire blog, is in order too. You comments yesterday were totally disrespectful and saying “they did it first” does not excuse you. Please Chuck think about what you are saying and doing to YOUR witness. And if that doesn’t work think about every other Christains witness that you are hurting also. Stop being a stumbing block to others.
By Chilao
February 23, 2006 09:12 AM | Link to this
Is there a difference between me sitting down in a non-smoker’s house and lighting up, knowing full and well they not only do not like smoke, but have requested I not smoke in their house…..
and addressing someone with a word they have specifically stated they do not wished to be addressed with?
naw, did not think so, I would consider me lighting up in their house showing MAJOR contempt for them and their wishes.
needless to say, I would never do that.
By Bruce
February 23, 2006 09:21 AM | Link to this
Mara, I apologize for my insensitive comment yesterday. It was totally uncalled for and it really bothered me last night. Everyone needs a friend and sometimes those that have that kind of adversty in their life need some good ones. I guess I was just jabbing back at you because you seem so quick to call me a liar about working with the prison system. Please accept my apology.
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this
I’m glad to see that this isn’t a discussion about Chuck and JBM, but about right and wrong.
Brian, I agree that the devil has finally shown his true colors and admitted (basically) that he is a child of satan, not of God.
As humbly as I can, I would call on all those who identify with the term “Christian” to completely denounce the devil’s actions as unChristian and certainly, un-Christ-like. Especially the Randys, Zacks, Julias, etc.
See, I’m thinking that even if the devil thinks I’m less than he is because I’m gay, or he thinks I’m a hypocrite, or teaching false doctrine or whatever - there is no justification whatsoever in being meanspirited and disrespectful. There is absolutely no justification in that. And, to wake up first thing in the morning - when most Christ-followers are still thanking God for another day, for life and health, for new mercy - that son of satan is up thinking of more hateful words to continue from where he left off yesterday.
I’m so glad that he’s made himself completely clear to everyone.
You’d have to be a fool to feel convicted or condemned by anything he says, or to believe that anything he says is in line with Jesus’s teachings.
Chuck is a demon, wandering to and from, seeking whom he may devour, annoy, disturb, offend, ridicule, mock, hurt or upset.
Christ-followers wander around seeking whom they may encourage, uplift, motivate, love, teach, edify and comfort.
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this
That was real big of you, Bruce.
By candide
February 23, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this
You Christian bigots are pikers. Look at how the Shiites and Sunnis in Iraq are about to slaughter one another on behalf of Allah. You Christers are just kids in comparison.
By Jack
February 23, 2006 09:48 AM | Link to this
Chuck cast a big hook loaded with bait and is waiting for a bite Put him on ignore.
Randy it is comical that you claim to know the real name of Candide. Candide probably is Norman but you have no idea what his real name is. if you used his real name on this blog then he has grounds for hunting you down and bringing suit on your a$$.
By Bruce
February 23, 2006 09:50 AM | Link to this
No JBM it was the right thing to do but thanks.
By Renee
February 23, 2006 09:52 AM | Link to this
I was actually going to say that too Bruce. Very dignified.
By Sanhan
February 23, 2006 09:52 AM | Link to this
Namaste all. So, anyone see that the Vatican now has Zen? Cardinal Zen from China… I guess even nomimal Zen is better than nothing.
Brian Curtis, you (once again) took the words out of my mouth. Chuck has told and shown us who he is; at this point we should just believe him and though we are loathe to for whatever reason, we should let him be and move on. We’re not likely to change him through anger or hostility, nor should we try, just he is not going to change any of us through anger or hostility.
In the tradidition of balance and Zen, (referring to the philosophy, not the Cardinal) we all have the same capacity to hate and harm, and conversely we have the same capacity to love and heal. Let’s consciously put our energy in the latter and see the shift that takes place. It doesn’t require belief in a deity, just belief in energy and one’s self.
As I’ve stated before, I understood more about Christianity when I learned about Zen and the Tao. As written, I’m sure neither is totally right and neither is totally wrong. But I enjoy the challenge of applying them to the world at large, and marveling in what each can reveals.
Even my 7-year-old understands that love is stronger than indifference and hate, and to quote him, with big blue eye roll, “Everyone knows that.”
If only.
By lozen
February 23, 2006 10:02 AM | Link to this
I think Chuck quit taking his meds. Unfortunately he’s still influencing kids in a public school. That’s the real shame. JBM you know I don’t share your beliefs but I do respect you very much. I do not respect people like Chuck, Randy and Zack or their beliefs. And speaking of Zack what is wrong with a man who wants to force women to have kids they don’t want? A man who can never understand what it means to be pregnant wants all fetuses to be carried to term. Never mind that women realize their life will have to be sacrificed to another for the next 18 or 20 years! If a woman knows she just isn’t ready to do that or can’t do that for mental, physical, emotional or financial reasons, it seems far more responsible to end the pregnancy. We all know women who have kids they didn’t want. The kids suffer. Our society suffers many times because kids who aren’t loved usually have tremendous problems. On the other hand, Zack would not allow gays to adopt I’m sure. So, in other words people who really want children he would prevent from having them, but women who don’t want to have children he would force to have them! Weird, weirder, weirdest.
By Chilao
February 23, 2006 10:02 AM | Link to this
In the tradidition of balance and Zen, (referring to the philosophy, not the Cardinal)
is that fullZen, nominalZen or the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance Zen?
hahahahahah
By candide
February 23, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this
Jacek: I am busy sticking pins in a doll I have that looks an awful lot like Randy: big head, little or no cojones, big ears. But then, it could be Dubya.
I’m no norman, i’m a saxon, a lower-saxon.
By Jack K
February 23, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this
DID YOU KNOW? As you walk up the steps to the building which houses the U.S Supreme Court you can see near the top of the building a row of the world’s law givers and each one is facing one in the middle who is facing forward with a full frontal view —- ———it is Moses and he is holding the Ten Commandments!
DID YOU KNOW? As you enter the Supreme Court courtroom, the two huge oak doors have the Ten Commandments engraved on each lower portion of each door.
DID YOU KNOW? As you sit inside the courtroom, you can see the wall, right above where the Supreme Court judges sit, a display of the Ten Commandments!
DID YOU KNOW? There are Bible verses etched in stone all over the Federal Buildings and Monuments in Washington, D.C.
DID YOU KNOW? James Madison, the fourth president, known as “The Father of Our Constitution” made the following statement: “We have staked the whole of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.”
DID YOU KNOW? Patrick Henry, that patriot and Founding Father of our country said: “It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians, not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ”.
DID YOU KNOW? Every session of Congress begins with a prayer by a paid preacher, whose salary has been paid by the taxpayer since 1777.
DID YOU KNOW? Fifty-two of the 55 founders of the Constitution were members of the established orthodox churches in the colonies.
DID YOU KNOW? Thomas Jefferson worried that the Courts would overstep their authority and instead of interpreting the law would begin making law an oligarchy- the rule of few over many.
DID YOU KNOW? The very first Supreme Court Justice, John Jay, said: “Americans should select and prefer Christians as their rulers.”
How, then, have we gotten to the point that everything we have done for 220 years in this country is now suddenly wrong and unconstitutional?
It is said that 86% of Americans believe in God. Therefore, it is very hard to understand why there is such a mess about having the Ten Commandments on display or “In God We Trust” on our money and having God in the Pledge of Allegiance.
By Sanhan
February 23, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this
Chilao, Now and Zen? Or in terms of reincarnation, Zen Again. (Someone stop me before I hurt myself…)
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this
Jack K. Yes, I did know - since I’ve read that before.
By Sanhan
February 23, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this
Jack K, some of us think we ought to apply and honor the Bill of Rights and the Constitution in our governmental buildings rather than the 10 Commandments. The founding fathers saw to the birth of a democratic republic, a governmental and social institution, not a “Shining City on the Hill.” Give to God what is God’s, give to American Democracy what is American Democracy’s.
See MyBillofRights.org.
Some of us also think that anytime anyone speaks in Congress or the White House, anywhere that the presidential seal is displayed, folks ought to be under oath. I think that’s a better use of God in government.
By Renee
February 23, 2006 10:27 AM | Link to this
Evolution and diversity is what has changed in 220 years. The country was not as diverse, with so many differences in beliefs. And Christianity in itself has evolved and broken down into so many subreligions. Therefore, even though it is possible many people believe in GOD, they don’t believe that Church and State should be together and doesn’t mean that they grasp a religion per say.
What needs to be learned is tolerance. A non “Christian” is tolerant of any Christian until the religion is forced upon him by laws, etc. If one division of Christianity does not believe in abortion, that does not make it the end all that be all. This is where people are given the freedom of choice. You can either have an abortion or not. As a doctor or health care provider, you can choose whether you provide abortions to your patients. Because you and your congregation, your neighborhood, your senator etc.. does not believe, then everybody should be prohibited. This falls true for anything, that is a belief. A belief is not right or wrong, and people should be able to choose their own beliefs and actions as long as it does not interfere with anothers life, liberty or personal property.
By Jack
February 23, 2006 10:30 AM | Link to this
Sandy your last post reminded me of the joke: How do you know a politician is lieing? His lips are moving.
By Misc. Reader
February 23, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this
The Catholic Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.” From Latest Catechism - Includes the corrections by Pope John Paul II on 8 September 1997
By candide
February 23, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this
The Ten Commandments come from the Code of Hamurabi. Why are we putting up Iraqi social rules (Babylon is now Iraq) on our public buildings? Do we believe in Marduk? Well, maybe you do Randy….
By Renee
February 23, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this
per se oops. I’m sure that’s not the only error but….
By Gob
February 23, 2006 10:53 AM | Link to this
Jack K - Taking the public remarks of the founding fathers doesn’t always give you insight to their true beliefs. They were often trying to appeal to a mass constituancy (just like pols today), so their message often reflected what the masses wanted to hear. If you read some of the more personal writings (letters to friends, journals, etc), it is pretty clear that many of the founding fathers were either diest (not christian) or agnostic.
When the nation was in its infancy, the leaders couldnt afford to loss large segments of support. It would have lead to rebellions. Quite a lot (not all though) of the religious writings and statements were made to keep the peace. Seemed to work pretty well too, but it doesnt change the fact that they most certainly did not want the country to be a theocracy, as many christians today claim.
By HolyRoller
February 23, 2006 10:56 AM | Link to this
When are people going to start paying attention? Nothing came before Adam and Eve and the Jewish explanation of events. Get with the program already.
By RF
February 23, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this
Personally I don’t see a problem with recognizing our judao-christian heritage in general, but I do have a problem with the way many use that heritage as part of their campaign of terror against any who disagree with them. I was up late last night and happened to be flipping channels. I ran across this program narrated by Kirk Cameron (who has dived into the deep end of religion in recent years). It was all about fear, fear, fear. I thought about how easily those who are impressionable could be driven to absolute paranoia by the current ‘fear God, fear evil, and fear God plunging you into the burning abyss’ montra churches use these days.
It frightens me that so many who lead such seemingly respectable lives can be so narrow-minded, predjudiced, and inhumane. I read recently that we seem to be moving backwards instead of forwards in race relations these days. I saw a news report about the ‘new klan’ on TV that shows how they are aligning with the neo-nazis ( I refuse to capitalize any of those names) to promote white supremacy. And these are educated, supposedly moral people!! And to that mix add folks like Chuck, who honestly believe his god gives him the right to judge, condemn, and otherwise spew evil at people because of ‘righteousness’. What a country of fools we are becoming. All we can do I guess is hope we can keep them in check for the time being. And satan is indeed alive and well and in your neighborhood baptist church!
Somebody get the spray paint. The red horns holding up some of the halos around here are starting to show!! LOL
Renee, get the combat boots on; I’ll get the stereotypical moves going; JBM get the Pinto and bring your pole-eyed self on so we can stomp some hypocritical butt!!!
By kimberly
February 23, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this
Jack K, and interested others: Research, people! A little trip to snopes.com gives you the skinny:
(1) The United States Capitol does NOT house the Supreme Court of the United States. (Duh!) The Supreme Court has met in its own building since 1935.
(2) The two representations of Moses which adorn the Supreme Court building both present him in a context in which he is depicted as merely one of several historical exemplars of lawgivers, not as a religious figure. The depiction referred to here is a sculpture entitled “Justice the Guardian of Liberty” by Hermon A. McNeil, which appears on the eastern pediment of the Supreme Court building — the BACK of the building, not the front, so you would not see it walking up the front steps.
The sculpture was intended to be a symbolic representation of three of the Eastern civilizations from which our laws were derived, personified by the figures of three great lawgivers: Moses, Confucius, and Solon (surrounded by several allegorical figures representing a variety of legal themes)
(3) The doors of the Supreme Court courtroom don’t literally have the “Ten Commandments engraved on each lower portion” — the lower portions of the two doors are engraved with a symbolic depiction, two tablets bearing only the Roman numerals I through V and VI through X.
The wall “right above where the Supreme Court judges sit” is the east wall, on which is displayed a frieze designed by sculptor Adolph A. Weinman. The frieze features two male figures who represent the Majesty of Law and the Power of Government, flanked on the left side by a group of figures representing Wisdom, and on the right side by a group of figures representing Justice:
According to Weinman, the designer of this frieze, the tablet visible between the two central male figures, engraved with the Roman numerals I through X, represents not the Ten Commandments but the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution, collectively known as the Bill of Rights.
The friezes which adorn the north and south walls of the courtroom in the Supreme Court building (also designed by Adolph Weinman) depict a procession of 18 great lawgivers: Menes, Hammurabi, Moses, Solomon, Lycurgus, Solon, Draco, Confucius and Octavian (south wall); Justinian, Mohammed, Charlemagne, King John, Louis IX, Hugo Grotius, Sir William Blackstone, John Marshall and Napoleon (north wall).
According to the Office of the Curator of the Supreme Court of the United States, these figures were selected as a representation of secular law.
Snopes has more on the questionable origin of the quotes Jack K provided as well!
By Jack
February 23, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this
Hey Kim. :)
By Brian Curtis
February 23, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this
Jack K:
Our nation started off with a lot of fine ideals… and very narrow interpretations of those prinicples that needed to be expanded and improved as we grew more civilized.
“We the People,� for example, was at first understood to mean exclusively white male landowners. Only in later years did we recognize that blacks, women, and the poor deserved equality under the law; the Founders did not.
Slavery was preserved as an institution, even protected, in the first years of our nation. Only after a bloody Civil War did we recognize that it was indefensible and unacceptable; the Founders did not.
And religion, to the Founders, meant their own personal faith (NOT Christianity, by the way, but deism). Thomas Jefferson, the architect of religious freedom in Virginia, still focused his attention solely on the Bible. Only in recent decades have we grown smart enough and civilized enough to realize that everyone (again) deserves equality before the government, regardless of Christian or non-Christian beliefs.
The Founders didn’t recognize that; but we do. America has grown and improved since 1776. Rights and freedoms have been expanded as the principles of democracy have been better understood and implemented to a broader and more diverse group of Americans. That’s progress… and even if they couldn’t know exactly what form that growth would take, the Founder WERE smart enough to expect it and build in provisions to review and amend the Constitution’s ideals over time. Which we’ve done.
So what’s your point?
P.S. The “Godâ€? references on our money, and in the Pledge of Allegiance, were never there to begin with; they were inserted by an act of Congress during the Red Scare, and stand as a shameful reminder of our politicians’ cowardice and bigotry during a time of repressive paranoia. So again, what’s your point?
By Chilao
February 23, 2006 11:29 AM | Link to this
Is Kimberly trying to confuse us all with truthful facts? I was all ready to convert, until I saw the Mohammed name. oh wait, the only names I saw on there were Moses and Solomon. who are those other guys anyhow?
LMAO
(rhetorical comment, I don’t need explanations of the other names, lest someone try to edgumacate me and if you wonder about Napoleon, go to Louisiana and get in trouble)
By RF
February 23, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this
boy, the more kimberly posts, the more I like her. She’s one smart cookie!!
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this
Chilao, you’ve really been in rare form lately! What’s in your coffee? LOL!
Kimberly, thanks for adding balance.
RF, I’m ready to roll!!!!!
By lozen
February 23, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this
Jack K, so I’m assuming you do not believe in separation of church and state. Is that correct?
By RF
February 23, 2006 11:43 AM | Link to this
It’s also important to note that our founding fathers were of varying religious backgrounds as well. They read history and knew the eventual outcome of theocracy. They specifically framed the constitution to neither exclude nor include specific religious principles to prevent the new country from becoming a theocracy. Morality is part of our legal structure, and the collective moral response of our society influences the interpretation of existing laws and the design of new ones. What we have to keep in mind is that our original constitution reflects the need for diversity and the embracing of the basic morality that all cultures share. The more we try to bend it to fit the current conservative protestant wave in our society, the more problems it will cause down the road. We’re not learning from recent attempts to promote fear and narrow constitutional interpretation. If we’re not careful, we’ll end up with another McCarthy era inquisition, and this time it will likely be worse.
By kimberly
February 23, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this
You’re too kind, RF. I don’t feel smart. But I have learned not to just take someone’s word for anything! Ask & verify. Truth will hold up; puddles of poo will not.
By Lyrazel
February 23, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this
A building and its decorations really do not affect my life. Its the Bills and Laws made inside it that affect me. I am more concerned with the taxpayer cost of removing religious ornamentation than what the ornamentation signifies. What I like is that Moses has horns!!!
By lozen
February 23, 2006 11:45 AM | Link to this
Kimberly, fantastic job of refuting those “facts” accepted so blindly by some. Brian Curtis, don’t ever stop posting to this blog. You are so good at saying things I think but have trouble expressing.
By Renee
February 23, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this
I’m having a slight problem. Diva’s don’t wear combat boots!!! ~sigh~ Guess I can’t go!!!!
By Jack
February 23, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this
JBM. Looks like you got into the normal JBM mode. I like the JBM mode. RF I already knew that.
By Jack
February 23, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this
I was wondering when they were going to start sandblasting the carving off of Stone Mountain. It’s not PC you know.
By lozen
February 23, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this
I just read this news story about 26 men sentenced to five years in prison by a court in Abu Dhabi for organizing a gay wedding. The group said in court they were proud of what they did. A UAE official said the men might faced forced hormone treatment and lashings in addition to prison. (More and more I think Chuck, Randy, Zack and others would be so happy in an Arab country.) Believe it or not, our state department condemned the arrests and is urging the UAE to stop forced hormone and psychological treatments against the men! Islamic law criminalizes homosexual activity in UAE. These are the people who will be protecting our ports folks. Maybe Chuck and Randy and Zack can get jobs with them. I encourage them to apply.
By RF
February 23, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this
JBM- I’ll bring the truck- more room to carry them off!! LOL Boy, if I was as stereotypical as SOME like to think (I dare not mention names, lest I conjure the demon up!!), it’d be a hoot just seeing me drive the big ‘ol thing.
OH…and to respond to you from yesterday, I sooo could not be Jack from the show. I’d throw something out of place bouncing around like that!!
Chilao- I sooo cannot drink my coffee and read your posts at the same time—I’ll end up frying my keyboard!! LOL
Enjoy the afternoon. Looks like the rain might finally be leaving for a few days. I gotta go run some errands, so keep the ignorant in check for a while…or just whip them, whichever works!!
By lozen
February 23, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this
Lyrazel, I know the statue of Moses by Michalangelo has horns. Was there representation of Moses before that with horns? I love Freud’s ideas about Moses and the hebrews (although it may be simply fantasy on his part). He wrote a book about how Moses was an Egyptian who forced his idea of one god on the hebrews who had always worshipped many gods. He said the hebrews finally got so sick of Moses they murdered him. Then they felt so guilty about it, they adopted his teachings totally. When you read the story from that perspective, it’s really interesting.
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
Jack, I’m just being me. :-)
By lozen
February 23, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this
Jack, I wish they had never carved that thing on the mountain anyway. The mountain is awesome and didn’t need any embellishment IMO. I used to go there at night with my man and a canoe and row around the lake and picnic and do other things in the woods! Now it’s just overdone, over commercialized and costs so much money I go there once a year or less. Fond memories though…
By RF
February 23, 2006 12:08 PM | Link to this
Renee- you can come along with your well-dressed self. If I’m gonna do the non-stereotypical macho thing, your diva-ness will blend well!! Just be sure you wear some nice spike heels- they inflict pain.;- )
lozen- I bet if you check, they’re probably all sending money over there to continue ‘god’s work’ and calling it ‘missions’. I have to agree with Bush on one thing—we sooo need to get to a point where we don’t need so much of their dang oil.
kimberly- got a lot of poo puddles to dodge around here, don’t we? Unfortunately, once you scrape up the poo, it takes a while to get the stink out, and the stain can be all but impossible to get rid of. LOL!!!
By lozen
February 23, 2006 12:13 PM | Link to this
Wikipedia has this to say about the ten commandments:
In any reading of chapter 20 of the book of Exodus, that passage contains more than ten imperative statements, and Jewish law sees each imperative as representing a separate commandment, totalling 14 or 15 in all. Religious groups have divided the commandments in different ways. For instance, Catholics and Lutherans see the first six verses as part of the same command prohibiting the worship of pagan gods, while Protestants (except Lutherans) separate all six verses into two different commands (one being “no other gods” and the other being “no graven images”). The initial reference to Egyptian bondage is important enough to Jews that it forms a separate commandment. Catholics and Lutherans separate the two kinds of coveting (namely, of goods and of the flesh), while Protestants (but not Lutherans) and Jews group them together. A very similar, but not completely identical, list of commandments is found in Deuteronomy 5:1-22. Reference to each of the commandments and the consequences for not following them as a part of Hebrew Law are found throughout this book. In the New Testament book of Matthew 19 and elsewhere, Jesus refers to the commandments, but condenses them into two general commands: love God (Shema) and love other people (Ethic of reciprocity) (Matthew 22.34-40).
By Jewish and Proud of It
February 23, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this
When you read the story from that perspective, it’s really interesting.
Totally, patently false, but interesting.
By kimberly
February 23, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this
Lozen, roger that on the mountain. When Zell Miller sold it out to his buddies in the “hospitality” industry, it really went downhill. (Whatever happened to the conservative philopshy of: if it’s a good thing already, LEAVE IT ALONE!) My friends and I used to skip school on pretty spring days and drive out there, sunbathe, skinny dip, and…. stuff. (Watch out for the poison ivy!) It was perfect then, before they started to add “attractions.” What a sad story for such a beautiful place. I never go there now.
By lozen
February 23, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this
Jewish and Proud of it, how can you be so sure? You weren’t there, neither was Freud. I’m not saying he was right, but how can you know without question it’s false? We don’t know what was really going on and never will.
By lozen
February 23, 2006 12:25 PM | Link to this
Kimberly, why am I not surprised it was looney Zell that sold out our mountain?
By The72John
February 23, 2006 12:33 PM | Link to this
I thought I’d stick my head in and see if the flames were still being fanned. They aren’t so I figure I’d at least pop in and say “Hi”.
Jewish, and proud of it, when you say Totally, patently false, but interesting. what are you basing that on? I’m not saying that the version mentioned is acurate, but there are hardly reliable historical texts about Moses floating around. What’s more, the early Hebrews were clearly henotheists, so the idea of being pushed into monotheism isn’t completely off-base…
Just curious if you’re basing your certainty on religion or on some kind of scholarship.
By Jewish and Proud of It
February 23, 2006 12:35 PM | Link to this
lozen, I know from the teachings of my father, his father before him and his father before him and so on from the beginning of my family line.
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this
So glad to see you John.
By kimberly
February 23, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this
Gov. Miller did it in spite of the petitions he received, signed by thousands of the citizens he was supposed to represent. I collected a few of those signatures myself. It was before I understood how utterly UNimportant our elected officials actually find our opinions when they come without money attached. Sometimes I forget, but Johnny Isakson’s staff is always very kind and thoughtful each time they remind me that I don’t matter at all.
By Jack
February 23, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this
The good old days when visiting Stone Mountain was free. Not much commercial stuff. They did ruin it good.
By The72John
February 23, 2006 12:49 PM | Link to this
I don’t want to sound confrontational here, but…the EARLIEST written documents that eventually were compiled to form the Pentateuch are still centuries, if not millenia, divorced from the figures and events they purport to describe. Prior to their being written down they were passed orally from pre-literate generation to pre-literate generation.
Oral tradition by its nature changes dramatically just from one generation to the next. What effect do you think centuries of oral tradition would have on the source material?
By Scalia
February 23, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this
This gets funnier and funnier every day.
By Jack
February 23, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this
Embellishment John. Glad Chuck didn’t run you off. Your post reminds me of Fahrenheit 451 when they had to memorize the books so thay wouldn’t be lost forever.
By The72John
February 23, 2006 01:11 PM | Link to this
No chance, Jack. Just needed a day to separate and cool down. No point in letting my temper drag the blog down.
By Renee
February 23, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this
Welcome back John!!
By Jack
February 23, 2006 01:33 PM | Link to this
Scalia. I had to get my boots on when you mentioned the boa. Gettin deep on the blog! LOL
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 01:33 PM | Link to this
Jack, you’ve been around long enough to know that we run the trolls off, they don’t run us off.
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 01:36 PM | Link to this
John, I just really read your 12:49. That’s a really good question you posed.
Jewish and Proud, your name’s really difficult to shorten. Do you have a nickname we could call you?
By lozen
February 23, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this
72John, yea! You’re baaaaack!
By Renee
February 23, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this
JAP???
By Jewish and Proud of It
February 23, 2006 01:47 PM | Link to this
Freud received this idea from an early recording of a Greek writer named Manetho who wrote that Moses was an Egyptian ex-priest who became the leader of 80,000 lepers and other “polluted persons” who were forced out of Egypt.
By Zack
February 23, 2006 01:49 PM | Link to this
Brian Curtis—You said yesterday that the government shouldn’t put someone to death, as putting a murderer to death, in your opinion, is simply an act of repeating what the murderer did.
That’s actually not true. If A murders B, an innocent life, then if C, the government kills A, then C has killed a guilty life, not an innocent life, and the government owes it to society to provide this type of security, as opposed to letting some Jeffrey Dahmer or Charles Manson run loose.
Of course, we contradict ourselves by letting abortion remain legal.
By Jewish and Proud of It
February 23, 2006 01:49 PM | Link to this
Sure just call me Jew :)
By chuck
February 23, 2006 01:50 PM | Link to this
Hail, Hail, the gays all here
By Scalia
February 23, 2006 01:50 PM | Link to this
Yeah, I had to inject some humor. Way too tense in this camp for Scalini.
I was totally taken aback by Chuck. I understand JBM’s loosing it. But who wouldn’t have given the attack?
By Zack
February 23, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this
There should be a comma after “government” in the second sentence of paragraph two. I thought I hit the key. Maybe not well enough.
By casinos
February 23, 2006 01:54 PM | Link to this
dance all right Look (pointing though the window of the malt shop) casinos [url=http://www.casinolasveges.com]casinos[/url] You! Shut it down! Now! online casinos [url=http://www.casinolasveges.com]online casinos[/url] Marty swallowed hard remembering the Professor being gunned down in internet casinos [url=http://www.casinolasveges.com]internet casinos[/url] Knowing I am just like you I am like the double best casinos [url=http://www.casinolasveges.com]best casinos[/url] pockets He looked in the dusty mirror checking his appearance to make best online casinos [url=http://www.casinolasveges.com]best online casinos[/url] scowled He didnt think it was too funny He got to his feet and .
By lozen
February 23, 2006 01:55 PM | Link to this
Well, the Greeks would consider Hebrews “polluted persons” I guess. They probably thought anyone except Greeks were “polluted persons.” That still doesn’t mean it can’t be true that Moses was an ex-priest who led a group of people forced out of Egypt. I’m just saying….
By lozen
February 23, 2006 02:00 PM | Link to this
Zack don’t you want to go to work in UAE? I think you’d like it there. They think gays are criminals and women are not allowed the freedom to make any decisions for themselves about when they’re ready/able to have children and take care of them as they should be taken care of. Sounds great huh? You should apply for a job guarding the ports.
By Jack
February 23, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this
I hear the line being cast. WHO WILL BITE?
By Jack
February 23, 2006 02:03 PM | Link to this
Plenty of “polluted” people in New Orleans right now.
By kimberly
February 23, 2006 02:07 PM | Link to this
Jew&Proud, my Jewish friends are my FAVORITES. They’re always glad to see me, drag me out to nice places and parties, feed me too much, speak openly about anything, are ready to provide any favor they can, and always respect our differences. They never call me names, tell me I’m a sinner, or threaten me with everlasting hell. Although, whenever Buba (sp?) is down from NY, she does grill me as to why I’m not married and what is my plan for snagging a husband. Then we EAT! Haha!
By Zack
February 23, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this
Kimberly—If you don’t realize that tattoos and piercings are abnormal and inappropriate, don’t blame me for it.
“Women-hater”? Please don’t try to put me on your level. I guess you think those who oppose homosexuality hate gay people.
Speaking of which, I hate how people misuse the word “hate” nowadays. People say “Don’t hate the so-and-so…”; “The fans hated on him by booing him…”.
I hate stupid jargon, and please notice how I didn’t say, “I hate on stupid jargon.”
Man, the ACLU’s influence on the school system has influenced students to act, think, and talk just as stupidly as the ACLU does.
By Jewish and Proud of It
February 23, 2006 02:12 PM | Link to this
Lozen, that writing is actually regarded by most scholars as the very first public musings of an anti-Semite. It was meant as a degradation of the Jewish people, not as a fact of history.
By Brian Curtis
February 23, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this
Zack: Running down the various topics briefly:
You haven’t responded to my request for specifics or evidence on your earlier claim about the evils of Islam. Is some on the way?
Death Penalty: You present it as an either-or option: EITHER the murderer should be executed, OR they’ll be “running around loose.” I could’ve sworn we had things called prisons….
Abortion paradox: It’s only contradictory if you agree that abortion is the murder of an innocent person. If you don’t hold that view (and I don’t), then no contradiction exists.
Piercings: If you can’t see that what YOU consider “inappropriate” has no objective value outside your own preferences, don’t blame me for it.
Finally… haven’t you heard of slang? Clearly, the The ACLU’s and public schools’ reasoning skills are far superior to anything I’ve seen from you or Rev. “Chuck” Phelps.
By Zack
February 23, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this
Lozen—I have to return to work. I’ll read over the insulting post you sent me later, if it’ll make you feel better. I’ll show you the same consideration I showed Brian Curtis. Please show me the same consideration I asked him to show me by taking my posts to heart. Please also post on this blog with the intention of learning something, not attacking someone.
By The72John
February 23, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this
I’m not biting, Jack. Not with two lunatics posting their ramblings today. Best just to let them wear themselves out and go away.
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this
Jack, I think since he was declared a troll earlier this morning, there won’t be too much biting from the regulars.
Renee, I think JAP is a slur, isn’t it? Can’t remember if it’s a japanese or jewish slur, but it might be offensive… that’s why I hesitated to abbreviate. LOL. I guess I could’ve just said JAPOI, using his/her whole tag name… I think too much. lol
By Renee
February 23, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this
If you don’t realize that tattoos and piercings are abnormal and inappropriate
Tattoos and piercings are inappropriate????? Pierced ears too??? Are there inappropriate hairstyles, shoes, or jewelry.
Okay, can someone just give me a list of what is appropriate, that will be shorter than the list of whst is inappropriate And inappropriate to who????
By Jewish and Proud of It
February 23, 2006 02:22 PM | Link to this
Thanks Kimberly! I’ve often said that My Big Fat Greek Wedding could just as easily be called My Big Fat Jewish Wedding because it’s so similar it’s uncanny :)
By Scalia
February 23, 2006 02:22 PM | Link to this
Hey yo Zack, why you hatin’ on jargon, son? Especially considering that it is slang, not jargon.
By lozen
February 23, 2006 02:25 PM | Link to this
“The further one travels the less one knows.” “Tao te ching”
By Jewish and Proud of It
February 23, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this
Don’t worry about it JBM, I don’t take much of anything to heart. I don’t offend easily. I take the slang, remarks about my nose and heritage in stride, along with the Jew jokes (I’ve even told a few).
By Jack
February 23, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this
A nose ring isn’t very appropriate if one is going to interview for a high level management job not in the entertainment industry. A neck tattoo won’t help in getting that job either. A lower back tattoo will send a signal to the opposite sex. Not enough time Renee’.
By Scalia
February 23, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this
Renee: Just cover in black from head to toe and only show your eyes.
No Jimmy Choos, No Manolo Blahniks, no Nine West shoes, no high heel shoes of any sort. No skirts above the ankle. No ankles showing period. No nail polish. No make-up. No piercings.
Did I explain it right, Zack?
By lozen
February 23, 2006 02:30 PM | Link to this
Zack, ha,ha,ha,ha,ha. You are so silly! Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. It’s so funny to hear you call others stupid. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. It’s so funny when you tell people you don’t hate. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. It’s so funny when you ask people not to insult you!! Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
By Chilao
February 23, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this
JAP is considered derogatory, goes back to WWII. I made the snide remark when I was about 8, about a motorcycle that flew by our house, that “it was a Jap(bike)”. Man, did I get in trouble since my Mom heard me say it. Actually that was how I learned, I had heard playmates use it and did not know.
welcome back 72John.
did not mean to ruin anybody’s keyboard earlier, my apologies, but since they can be had for about $6.50 or so, probably less in corporate-bulk buying….LOL(joking)
By The72John
February 23, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this
Ah, but you’re making reasonable observations about piercings and tatoos from a professional standpoint, Jack. I believe that the inmate with the name that rhymes with your own is trying in vain to attach some sort of moral component to tatoos and piercings.
By noah
February 23, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this
Wearing gold jewelry to church is forbidden by the bible. Touching pig skin is forbidden by the bible. It is an abomination. Why aren’t preachers out on the football field every Friday night preaching about what a sin this is? Nah, they bless them sinners instead! I hate to think how many football players are gonna end up in the flames!
By Chilao
February 23, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this
I think you missed ZOOT SUITS.
By noah
February 23, 2006 02:39 PM | Link to this
I just wish people could tell the truth and instead of claiming they have to go back to work, just say, they’ve come for me with the white coat and i must go back to my room. But then again, he could be going back to making license plates. Yeah, that’s the ticket.
By The72John
February 23, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this
Eh, Chilao, I think you’ve got your meanings mixed up. There’s “Jap”, a slang term dating back to WWII used to refer to the Japanese, and then there’s JAP, acronym for Jewish-American Princess.
By Jack
February 23, 2006 02:41 PM | Link to this
Noah. Why the Hell did you bring the mosquitoes and fleas? We really could have done without them.
By Jack
February 23, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this
The lord did help Evander beat Mike Tyson. (and a hard head)
By Renee
February 23, 2006 02:49 PM | Link to this
Okay if I was offensive with JAP, didn’t mean to be…I was merely abbreviating Jewish And Proud…
Jack - inappropriate is very relative. I don’t think he was speaking of jobs, he was speaking of his personal opinion. I know a lot of people who wear nose and eyebrow rings, they don’t wear them to work because the office may have a policy, not because anyone deems them inappropriate. I may view see through pants as inappropriate to a formal gathering, someone else may view them as completely appropriate.
By Chilao
February 23, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this
72John - yes, you are right, a case issue, I almost did lower case the ‘ap’, and have seen that “JAP” in personal ads, and they were not from Tokyo. LOL (Ok, I’ll stop).
So I guess JAP is not derogatory, just Jap.
By Renee
February 23, 2006 02:52 PM | Link to this
No Manolo Blahniks, no Nine West shoes
Okay, THIS is where I draw the line!!!
By Renee
February 23, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this
And professionalism is different from someone’s moral personal opinion on what they deem to be inappropriate.
If you got the money do what you want!!! Pierce what you want, tat yourself from head to toe…whatever!!!
By kimberly
February 23, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this
Was tempted to tat, but retreated to more temporary forms of self-expression.
By Jack
February 23, 2006 03:03 PM | Link to this
Is it getting warm in here or is it just me?
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 03:05 PM | Link to this
I don’t have the courage to get one, although the older I get the more I’m fascinated by them…
In recent months, I’ve wanted one on my lower back or my upper arm. It’s probably one of those things I’ll talk about forever, and never actually do.
By noah
February 23, 2006 03:06 PM | Link to this
Every time a christian sees a beautiful car on the road and thinks, I wish I had that car! are they not breaking one of the commandments? When a christian works on Sunday isn’t she breaking one of the extraordinarily important big ten? It doesn’t matter if I do that since I’m not a christian. I don’t worship yahweh or any other god. Shouldn’t he be punishing me for not bowing down to him like some servant bows down to his master? I have a great life with no bowing and scraping, no a-s-s kissing of an invisible god. If I wanted to believe in fairies, elves, angels, gods, and such, I’d believe in a hermaprodite god with characteristics of both male and female and lots of tattoos. just never could believe in the far-fetched tales about yahweh and jesus. I don’t believe elvis is still alive, and I don’t believe in psychic surgery.
By The72John
February 23, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this
Jack, I’m starting to get worried about you. You seem to be having hot flashes a lot lately.
By Julia
February 23, 2006 03:09 PM | Link to this
Hot flashes again Jack?
By Chilao
February 23, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
You can get the temporary ones that wash off in a few.
By Chilao
February 23, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this
I did not think it was getting hot on the blog but as soon as Jack mentioned that, I noticed there was something wrong with the heating here. LOL seemed to be finally pumping an excessive amount of extremely warm air.
By Jack
February 23, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this
Only when hot females are on the blog. (I know, I’m a dog)
By Renee
February 23, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this
Henna tatoos are temporary
By lozen
February 23, 2006 03:23 PM | Link to this
Yeah Jack I noticed it’s always right after Kimberly says something that you flash!
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this
Noah, working on Sunday isn’t breaking any rule or law, Biblical or otherwise.
Hello there, Julia. So nice to see you today.
By kimberly
February 23, 2006 03:28 PM | Link to this
There are worse things than a dog that a man could be.
{;->
By Jack
February 23, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
Heeheehee!
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this
I think being called a dog should be a good thing, not an insult. Dogs are so loyal and committed, loving and reliable, dependable, and easily trained! :-)
By Jack
February 23, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this
Gotta go. Need a cold shower. Trying to get visions of freckles, green eyes and flowing red hair out of my head. (Yes Zack. I am sinning. Sorry.)
By RF
February 23, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this
Jack’s either going through troll seasonal mating thing or he likes those red-headed bloggers! That or he’s eating too many teenagers again. They get troll hormones all out of whack!!
Good to see you John. JBM held down the fort quite well for you.
JBM- just think how that tattoo will look when you’re about 80 and the skin gets a little looser. I’ve got a friend who got one on her ankle for that reason. She started to get it on her tummy, but decided she’d have to lift ‘the sisters’ out of the way in a couple of decades to see it!! LOLOL
By Mara
February 23, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this
Awww. Dang. Stupid %7#@?!# work! How can I blog when they keep making me work?! I missed getting a chance to reciprocate Bruces’ apology and air-hug, but better late than never. Bruce, I misjudged you. By your words, you are a stand-up guy and I truly apologize for casting aspersions on your honesty. Jack, just one question about your 2:27 post. What kind of high-level management job do you think Renee would interview for where they’d check under her clothes for tatoos? Arch-bishop?
By Chilao
February 23, 2006 03:39 PM | Link to this
easily trained!
and no clue as to why that might be insulting?
LMAO
By Bruce
February 23, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this
OK tomorrow is Friday I hope you all have yoru jokes ready…….
By kimberly
February 23, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this
Dog is love.
By Julia
February 23, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this
Hi Just Being Me! I just stopped by to see what was happening in the wide world of blogs.
I see you’ve had your share of aggravation today. Let’s all meet up at mexican restaurant for margaritas to chill out and relax. (Jack may have to lay off the viagra though!) And you can’t sit next to Chuck ok. I’ll even buy the first two pitchers…but who’s the designated driver?
Actually I haven’t had a margarita in over 4 years. But the way this week’s been going it sure sounds good.
By Jack
February 23, 2006 03:45 PM | Link to this
Well she could wear a turtle neck sweater. Hard to hide the nose ring though.
RF. This troll just wishes he could have his cake and eat it too! LOL (Guess what my favorite cake is)
Nite All
By Bruce
February 23, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this
Mara, I would quit a job that made me work..Ha! See ya’ll tomorrow it quittin’ time.
By RF
February 23, 2006 03:52 PM | Link to this
well dang, if Julia’s buying, what are we waiting for? But do we HAVE to invite the morons? I’m not going to be the DD but I’ll pitch in for cab-fare!
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this
Julia, thanks, but I don’t dine with the devil. And, no offense, but I’d really rather not dine with people who would invite the devil to dinner.
That’s too bad, though, because mexican sure sounds good right about now.
By noah
February 23, 2006 04:05 PM | Link to this
Excuse me JBM but the ten commandments do say. Verses 8-11: “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.” Of course, technically this meant Saturday and not Sunday because these rules were given to the Hebrews and Sat. is the Hebrew sabbath. So is it a sin for christians to work on Saturday?
By noah
February 23, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this
Verses 8-11: “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.”
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 04:12 PM | Link to this
Noah, yes, in my opinion, it is. You originally suggested that the sabbath was Sunday, a claim that I reject.
I understood what you meant, but I was being technical.
By Julia
February 23, 2006 04:16 PM | Link to this
So now you’re calling Chuck the devil?! I know you two had words, but to call him the devil is a bit much don’t you think.
Anyone else want to go (minus a few folks)?
~~Bad, bad week at work.~~
By Chilao
February 23, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this
Noah - do research on the Council of Laodicea(5th century) when the formal day was established, up until then both Sat and Sunday were used as worship days, with most actual ‘day of rests’ and worshipping, happening on Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath.
Chuck had some long rigamorole to justify the Sunday worship day, which supported my view much was ‘man said…blahblahblah…”. Since Moses(word of God) meant what is still today the Jewish Sabbath. And I still say ‘man said’ “change the day”.
It is a stickler point I have with all the foaming at the mouth “IZE SO RIGHT AND IF YOU DON’T THINK LIKE ME YUZE GOIN TO HELL” Sunday worshippers.
By Julia
February 23, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this
I’ll even send a limo to pick everyone up. (Forget the DD.)
Oh yeah, forgot to mention I just won the lottery. ;)
~~~don’t I wish~~~(sigh)
By noah
February 23, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this
It’s one of those uber hypocrite things. The bible says its an abomination for a man to lie with a man and you gays are going to hell and shouldn’t be allowed to marry and should not practice sex and should not be allowed to be bishops or priests etc.etc. but it’s okay to work on the sabbath (whatever day that is to you) even though the ten commandments say you should not work on the sabbath because … well, it’s just okay. So we christians who work on the sabbath can yell and scream at you gays about how sinful you are.
By Chilao
February 23, 2006 04:25 PM | Link to this
and to paraphrase Seinfeld, “Not that there is anything wrong with that, being a Sunday Worshipper”..LOL
By lozen
February 23, 2006 04:25 PM | Link to this
Sorry Julia. I agree with JBM. Chuck is definitely the devil. And I didn’t even believe in the devil until I met him on this blog.
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 04:27 PM | Link to this
Julia, you might want to play catch up before you question my calling a spade a spade, and the devil by his name. If you feel like it, read all the posts on yesterday, and the first one from today.
I’m sure you’ll get a clear understanding of why I’m calling the devil out, and if you know anything about Christ, you’ll probably agree with me.
By The72John
February 23, 2006 04:30 PM | Link to this
Chuck isn’t the devil. He’s not important enough to be the devil. He’s more like a low-level satanic functionary with delusions of beuracratic grandeur.
By Randy
February 23, 2006 04:35 PM | Link to this
Practicing homosexuality is a sin, just like, working on the sabbath, looking in lust etc. Jesus, the good spirit(or the creator of the universe, whichever name you want to call that entity) will forgive them all and none is more of a sin than another one. However, when you become a Christian you don’t need to sin as much, your human, so sinning will happend, but it is not as prevelant.
By Randy
February 23, 2006 04:39 PM | Link to this
Chuck is no devil, he is a good Christian who has made a standard mistake. Namely, if you argue with someone to long they will drag you down with them into the dirt. Alot of Christians(including myself) have made this mistake on this site. We want to help, don’t know how, and have developed a habbit of coming on this site.
By Jack K
February 23, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this
Looks like 72 took his medication today.
Thumbs up buddy! Good show.
Hey Julia, can I come too? I’ll even buy a few pitchers and some cheese dip (lots of jalapenos please). The limo isn’t even required.
By Randy
February 23, 2006 04:42 PM | Link to this
I meant Rabbit.
By Just Being Me
February 23, 2006 04:45 PM | Link to this
Randy, bow out now before you regret it.
A “good Christian” doesn’t make “a standard mistake” (whatever the heck that is) over and over again… a “good Christian” who makes a mistake will repent immediately and do everything he/she can to right his/her wrong.
I pity you because you are one of the two most ignorant people on this site. The devil may be evil but at least he’s not ignorant. You are just plain ignorant. You have no idea what to support and what not to, what is right and what isn’t… you’re just a clueless, pitiful follower with no mind of his own.
By The72John
February 23, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this
How will I become perfect if I don’t practice?
Some people need to learn when their “help” is neither wanted nor welcomed. It’s ok - you’re a low-level satanic functionary, too, Randy. The devil jumps for joy every time you encourage hatred in the world.
By Anonymous
February 23, 2006 04:57 PM | Link to this
Randy-so you’re saying the problem isn’t with ONE sin in particular. It’s all sin. No one’s perfect right? But once you become a Christian you try to rid sin from your life instead of wallowing in it?
Once your sin is forgiven and washed away by Christ you become a new creation. You don’t want to wallow in the mud like you used to before being forgiven. Sometimes we do slip and fall into the mud. That’s human nature. But Christ takes our hand and pulls us back to our feet again and guides us.
The trouble is that sometimes we can be very hard-headed (like JBM) and not want to let go of our old sinful habits. Not just talking about being gay, but about ANY sin-lying, gossiping, cheating, etc. The point is that if you are a true follower of Christ your goal is to get out of the mud and leave those sinful things in the past.
That is something all followers of Christ want to do and try to do. Sometimes we make mistakes but when we do the Holy Spirit convicts us of it and leads us to the right path again.
Becomming a Christian doesn’t mean that you will NEVER MAKE MISTAKES. Only one person that walked the face of this earth was perfect…Jesus Christ. If you want perfection you won’t find it in any human being on this earth. Look to Christ.
By The72John
February 23, 2006 05:01 PM | Link to this
Yep Jack K, you got it. I’m the one who needs medication because I don’t appreciate being gay-bashed! Interesting how your mind works.
By candide
February 24, 2006 07:17 AM | Link to this
You don’t prohibit something that no one commits. Therefore, the Old Testament slam on men lying with men means that it was something rather often done. Similarly, all the ten commandments forbid things that were commonly done.
So you Christers who slam gays are probably secret sodomites. Just like all those men in skirts in the church who condemn sex and all that while chasing little boys and little girls.
Woe ye scribes and pharisees. Woe ye Randys and all ye Christers. Hell awaits you.
By Brian Curtis
February 24, 2006 07:44 AM | Link to this
Well, another week fending off the lunacy and spittle-spewing hatred of people who claim to be acting “in God’s name.” Zealotry sure is productive!
Now, on to the jokes.
By Renee
February 24, 2006 07:54 AM | Link to this
Okay today is joke day. No serious issues. No preaching at, preaching to, bashing, etc…
By Lyrazel
February 24, 2006 07:55 AM | Link to this
Its FRIDAY! Its FRIDAY! Its FRIDAY! Enjoy!
When NASA was preparing for the Apollo Project, it took the astronauts to a Navajo reservation in Arizona for training. One day, a Navajo elder and his son came across the space crew walking among the rocks. The elder, who spoke only Navajo, asked a question, “What are all these guys in the big suits doing?”Â
One of the astronauts said that they were practicing a trip to the moon.Â
When his son relayed this comment, the Navajo elder got all excited and asked if it would be possible to give to the astronauts a message to deliver to the moon.Â
Recognizing a promotional opportunity when he saw one, a NASA official accompanying the astronauts said, “Why certainly!” Then he told an underling to get a tape recorder. The Navajo elder’s comments into the microphone were brief. The NASA official asked the son if he would translate what his father had said. The son listened to the recording and laughed uproariously. But he refused to translate.Â
So the NASA people took the tape to a nearby Navajo village and played it for other members of the tribe. They too laughed long and loudly but also refused to translate the elder’s message to the moon. An official government translator was summoned. After he finally stopped laughing the translator relayed the message:Â
“WATCH OUT FOR THESE A*****. THEY HAVE COME TO STEAL YOUR LAND.”Â
By Renee
February 24, 2006 07:56 AM | Link to this
God was tired and worn out. So he spoke to St. Peter.
“You know, I need a vacation. Got any suggestions where I should go?”
St. Peter, thinking, nodded his head, then said, “How about Jupiter? It’s nice and warm there this time of the year.”
God shook His head before saying, “No, too much gravity. You know how that hurts my back.”
“Hmmm,” St. Peter reflected. “Well, how about Mercury?”
“No way!” God muttered. “It’s way too hot for me there!”
“I’ve got it,” St. Peter said, his face lighting up. “How about going down to Earth for your vacation?”
Chuckling, God remarked, “Are you kidding? Two thousand years ago I went there, had an affair with some nice Jewish girl, and they’re STILL talking about it!”
By Renee
February 24, 2006 08:13 AM | Link to this
A clergyman was walking down the street when he came upon a group of about a dozen boys, all of them between 10 and 12 years of age.
The group surrounded a dog. Concerned lest the boys were hurting the dog, he went over and asked “What are you doing with that dog?”
One of the boys replied, “This dog is just an old neighborhood stray. We all want him, but only one of us can take him home. So we’ve decided that whichever one of us can tell the biggest lie will get to keep the dog.”
Of course, the reverend was taken aback. “You boys shouldn’t be having a contest telling lies!” he exclaimed. He then launched into a ten minute sermon against lying, beginning, “Don’t you boys know it’s a sin to lie,” and ending with, “Why, when I was your age, I never told a lie.”
There was dead silence for about a minute. Just as the reverend was beginning to think he’d gotten through to them, the smallest boy gave a deep sigh and said, “All right, give him the dog.”
By Renee
February 24, 2006 08:16 AM | Link to this
Little Johnny’s is coming home from the store swinging the loaf of bread in one hand and the other hand in his pants pocket.
Along come Priest Joe and he thinks to himself, “This is a good opportunity to say something from the bible to Little Johnny.”
He walks up to Little Johnny and says, “I see Little Johnny that you have the Staff of Life in one hand. What do you have in the other?”
Little Johnny replies, “A loaf of bread Father.”
By Renee
February 24, 2006 08:32 AM | Link to this
Guy goes to hell and is met by the devil, who explains that the punishments are changed every thousand years and he is to select his first punishment.
First room has a young guy on the wall being whipped. The new guy not keen on this asks to see the next room. The next room has a middle aged guy being tortured with fire.
The new guy immediately asks to see the third room. It has an really old guy chained to the wall getting oral sex from a gorgeous blonde.
The guy jumps at the chance and takes the room.
The devil walks into the room taps the blonde on the shoulder and says “okay, you can stop now. You’ve been relieved”.
By The72John
February 24, 2006 09:23 AM | Link to this
I had a really great joke and I forgot to bring it with me. :-(
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 09:35 AM | Link to this
Hilarious, Renee. (feel better? LOL)
one reminded me of a Sarah Silverman joke:
I was raped by a doctor. Which is bittersweet for a Jewish girl
By chuck
February 24, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this
Well, another week fending off the lunacy and spittle-spewing hatred of people who frankly don’t know their butts from a hole in the ground.
On to the jokes:
A blonde has been attending Blonde International Training College, a school set up to give blondes a chance to make it in the real world, for 10 years. She keeps failing this one class that she needs to graduate : basic math. The administrators need to get her out to make room for new students, but can’t just give her the grade. So, they instead decide to ask her a simple math question at the graduation ceremony. If she answers correctly, she graduates. Sure enough, she fails the class again, and shouldn’t walk across the stage, but the admins invite her to the ceremony. They stand her before everyone and say, “Although you lack one class for graduation, we have decided to pass you if you can answer this one question. What is two plus two?” The blonde thinks about it for a while and finally says, “Four.” The crowd stands up in objection and demands, “Give her another chance!!”
By Mara
February 24, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this
An Irishman in a wheel chair entered a restaurant one afternoon and asked the waitress for a cup of coffee. The Irishman looked across the restaurant and asked, “Is that Jesus sitting over there?” The waitress nodded “yes,” so the Irishman told her to give Jesus a cup of coffee on him.
The next patron to come in was an Englishman with a hunched back. He shuffled over to a booth, painfully sat down, and asked the waitress for a cup of hot tea. He also glanced across the restaurant and asked,”Is that Jesus over there?” The waitress nodded again, so the Englishman said to give Jesus a cup of hot tea, too.
The third patron to come into the restaurant was a Redneck on crutches. He hobbled over to a booth, sat down and hollered, “Hey there sweet thang,how’s about gettin’ me a cold glass of RC!” He too, looked across the restaurant and asked, “Is that God’s boy over there?” The waitress nodded again, so the Redneck said to give Jesus a cold glass of RC, too.
As Jesus got up to leave, he passed by the Irishman, touched him and said, “For your kindness, you are healed.” The Irishman felt the strength come back into his legs, got up and danced a jig out the door.
Jesus also passed by the Englishman, touched him and said, “For your kindness, you are healed.” The Englishman felt his back straightening up,and he raised up his hands, praised the Lord and did a series of back flips out the door.
Then Jesus walked towards the Redneck. The Redneck jumped up and yelled, “Hey, man, don’t touch me…… I’m drawin’ disability!!!!!”
By Mara
February 24, 2006 09:45 AM | Link to this
What a woman says: “This place is a mess! C’mon, you and I need to clean up, Your stuff is lying on the floor and you’ll have no clothes to wear, if we don’t do laundry right now!?”
What a man hears: blah, blah, blah, blah, C’MON blah, blah, blah, blah, YOU AND I blah, blah, blah, blah, ON THE FLOOR blah, blah, blah, blah, NO CLOTHES blah, blah, blah, blah, RIGHT NOW
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 09:45 AM | Link to this
Hilarious Renee & Mara! Keep ‘em coming!
John, I have half a mind to send you back home!!!! ;-)
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this
LOL @ “redneck”
hot off of the email inbox is a slew of George Carlin’s new rules for 2006, just received from a friend. I will post some as the day moves along, starting with:
New Rule: and this one is long overdue: No more bathroom attendants. After I zip up, some guy is offering me a towel and a mint like I just had sex with George Michael. I can’t even tell if he’s supposed to be there, or just some freak with a fetish. don’t want to be on your webcam, dude. I just want to wash my hands.
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 09:48 AM | Link to this
I haven’t even read all these yet. LOL
New Rule: Just because your tattoo has Chinese characters in it doesn’t make you spiritual. It’s right above the crack of your a*. And it translates to “beef with broccoli.” The last time you did anything spiritual, you were praying to God you weren’t pregnant. You’re not spiritual. You’re just high.
By The72John
February 24, 2006 09:50 AM | Link to this
Well, another week fending off the lunacy and spittle-spewing hatred of people who frankly don’t know their butts from a hole in the ground.
Yes, Chuck, you are very hard to deal with. I’m glad you realize that.
Thought for the day: Do you think that SS Officers in the concentration camps sat around thinking “I just can’t understand why those Juden don’t seem to like me…why in the world do they hate me so much?”
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this
Dedicated to blahblah, too bad he is out:
New Rule: Stop efing with old people. Target is introducing a redesigned pill bottle that’s square, with a bigger label. And the top is now the bottom. And by the time grandpa figures out how to open it, his butt will be in the morgue. Congratulations, Target, you just solved the Social Security crisis.
By chuck
February 24, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this
Haughty women like JBM, Renee, lozen, kimberly need to be smited with scabs on their heads and the uncovering of their private parts. The Bible says so.
Isaiah 3:16-17: “Moreover the Lord sayeth, Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, and walk with stretched forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go, and making a tinkling with their feet: Therefore the Lord will smite with a scab the crown of the the head of the daughters of Zion, and the Lord will discover their secret parts.”
By Whiley
February 24, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this
I’m not feeling very joke-e this morning.
PIERRE, South Dakota lawmakers have voted to outlaw nearly all abortions, setting up the first direct legal attack on Roe v. Wade by a state in 14 years REJECTING exceptions for INCEST OR RAPE or for the health of a mother and voted, 23-12, to outlaw all abortions, except those to save a mother’s life. “This represents a monumental step backward for personal privacy for women. This is a government direct attack on women.”
I will absolutely have nothing to do with South Dakota. Anything sold from that state I will refuse to purchase if possible. I’m going to contact each & every govt. official in that state.
My advice for ALL women in South Dakota is take your female children & run as fast as you can, get out of there now. South Dakota is DANGEROUS to all females & cares ABSOLUTELY NOTHING for your physical safety or YOUR LIFE.
SEE WHAT HAPPENS when you let nutjob religious freaks into your government? They are spreading their filth & we’d better wake up & do something about it now.
By Bruce
February 24, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this
a southern power co. needed to heir a new pole setting crew.
2 teams showed up for the job.
team A bubba and roy bob.
team B paddy and mick.
the line super tells’m to go out and set as many poles as they can.
end of the day team B shows up. super asks, how many?
12 says paddy. good says the super.
twent minutes later team A showes up. how many? askes the super.
3 says bubba. 3 ? the super askes. yep. 3 saysroy bob.
super says them others got 12 in.
yea says bubba, but you outta see how much they left out-o-the ground!
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this
New Rule: Competitive eating isn’t a sport. It’s one of the seven deadly sins. ESPN recently televised the US Open of Competitive Eating, because watching those athletes at the poker table was just too dang exciting. What’s next, competitive farting? Oh wait. They’re already doing that. It’s called “The Howard Stern Show.”
By The72John
February 24, 2006 09:59 AM | Link to this
Ladies, did you know you were haughty? I guess you need to be meeker. Since Chuck can’t beat you like he does the women in his own life, he has to resort to name-calling.
By Mara
February 24, 2006 10:02 AM | Link to this
One day in the future, George Bush has a heart attack and dies. He immediately goes to hell, where the devil is waiting for him.
“I don’t know what to do,” says the devil. “You are on my list, but I have no room for you. You definitely have to stay here, so I’ll tell you what I’m going to do. I’ve got some folks here who weren’t quite as bad as you. I’ll let one of them go, but you have to take their place. I’ll even let YOU decide who leaves.” Bush thought that sounded pretty good, so the devil opened the first room.
In it was Ronald Reagan and a large pool of water. He kept diving in and surfacing empty handed. Over and over and over. Such was his fate in hell. “No, George said. “I don’t think so. I’m not a good swimmer and I don’t think I could do that all day long.”
The devil led him to the next room. In it was Richard Nixon with a sledge hammer and a room full of rocks. All he did was swing that hammer, time after time after time. “No, I’ve got this problem with my shoulder. I would be in constant agony if all I could do was break rocks all day,” commented George.
The devil opened a third door. In it, Bush saw Bill Clinton, lying on the floor with his arms staked over his head, and his legs staked in a spread eagle pose. Bent over him was Monica Lewinsky, doing what she does best. Bush took this in disbelief and finally said, “Yea, I can handle this.” The devil smiled and said “OK, Monica, you’re free to go.”
By kimberly
February 24, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this
Chilao, actually those were from Bill Maher, not George Carlin. (Friday nights at 11:00, on HBO.) There are emails going around attributing them to Carlin; don’t know why.
By Mara
February 24, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this
I think that he meant they were “hotties”. You know how bad his kind are with spelling and syntax…
Chilao - LOL “beef with broccoli”
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this
Thought for the day: Do you think that SS Officers in the concentration camps sat around thinking “I just can’t understand why those Juden don’t seem to like me…why in the world do they hate me so much?�
I did not want to bring this up this week but the topic really did call for it. The flip of that thought for the day is how did a culture live in Europe for 1000 years and end up being so hated? I have to wonder if the Religious Superiority, that we see right here on this blog, was perhaps a factor. Like the US vs the Gentiles, We are God’s Chosen People(certainly implying we are better than you) that kinda of stuff. 1000 years of that and look what happened. Just a thought.
By kimberly
February 24, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this
Chuck, you are a nasty man. Stop using my name in vain. I don’t believe you ever prayed for me or any of us. Tinkling with our feet? I TOL’ y’all this b—-h crazy….
By The72John
February 24, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this
For some real-life humor, please look at the article about the Governor who didn’t realize that The Daily Show was a comedy program.
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this
Kimberly, sorry, that was on the top of the email, all I knew. Sounded kinda Carlin-ish so I did not question. LOL
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this
I saw that about the IL(?) governor and the comment from another pol “We thought he was hip enough to know that(it was a comedy show)”
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 10:16 AM | Link to this
My joke for the day. (Sorry, Whiley):
An excerpt from Matthew 7
Don’t condemn others, and God won’t condemn you. God will be as hard on you as you are on others! He will treat you exactly as you treat them.
You can see the speck in your friend’s eye, but you don’t notice the log in your own eye. How can you say, “My friend, let me take the speck out of your eye,” when you don’t see the log in your own eye? You’re nothing but hypocrites! First, take the log out of your own eye. Then you can see how to take the speck out of your friend’s eye.
Treat others as you want them to treat you. This is what the Law and the Prophets are all about.
Watch out for false prophets! They dress up like sheep, but inside they are wolves who have come to attack you. You can tell what they are by what they do. No one picks grapes or figs from thornbushes. A good tree produces good fruit, and a bad tree produces bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot produce good fruit. Every tree that produces bad fruit will be chopped down and burned. You can tell who the false prophets are by their deeds.
Not everyone who calls me their Lord will get into the kingdom of heaven. Only the ones who obey my Father in heaven will get in. On the day of judgment many will call me their Lord. They will say, “We preached in your name, and in your name we forced out demons and worked many miracles.” But I will tell them, “I will have nothing to do with you! Get out of my sight, you evil people!”
By Renee
February 24, 2006 10:16 AM | Link to this
Excuse me to everyone I offend.
Chuck you can kiss the crack of my black A-S-S and lick every piece of S-H-I-T I deposit there. You are an ignorant, ignorant poor excuse for a man.
By Julia
February 24, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this
Hooray for South Dakota!!! Thanks Whiley for that incredible update! This is going to be a beautiful day.
And by the way, they’re not “spreading the filth” as you put it. They are finally stopping the filth of abortion.
By Jack K
February 24, 2006 10:23 AM | Link to this
Renee, you sounded like Michael D.
By kimberly
February 24, 2006 10:24 AM | Link to this
Julia, do you have daughters? Just curious.
By Renee
February 24, 2006 10:25 AM | Link to this
South Dakota will still have abortions on the black market. Or they will have to go to another state. Like it or not, abortions will occur, regardless of the laws.
By Renee
February 24, 2006 10:29 AM | Link to this
I really don’t give a hoot who you think I sound like. You, Chuck, Randy, and whoever else play a nonexistent part in my life. However, I am not going to allow Chuck or anyone else to disrespect me on this blog. Especially, when I have NEVER disrespected him.
By Randy
February 24, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this
Good job South Dakota, trying to reduce the MURDER OF INNOCENT BABIES. I’ll buy anything from South Dakota and double up my purchases if necessary to compensate for Whiley.
By Randy
February 24, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this
If you want to have birth control, do it before sex, not before birth. South Dakota has clauses on rape and incest.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this
Kimberly, don’t even go there with her.
By Whiley
February 24, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this
BIBLE FREAKS should be allowed to live amongst us, but should not have any right to legislate their unusual & dangerous rules.
I feel better that I emailed a number of their reps. I couldn’t help but notice that there were only a few women & it seemed hundreds of men in elected offices. No wonder. How sad for the females in that state. Run ladies, run for YOUR LIVES.
By Mara
February 24, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this
kimberly, the Washington Post had an interesting article the other day about a study noting that the more daughters a Congressman had, the more likely he was to support womens reproductive rights. According to a NOW representative interviewed in the story “…a male representative was more likely to vote with NOW’s position on women’s issues, especially reproductive rights, if he had daughters. Specifically, the report says that “each daughter is associated with an increase of nearly three points” on NOW’s rating scale. The report adds that the association between voting records and daughters superseded any party affiliation. “
By Whiley
February 24, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this
Julia, you should move the South Dakota then. I think all religious nutjobs should move there. At least they’ll be quarantined from the rest of us.
No, that wouldn’t work, all the female children would end up child wives & pregnant by 13.
That’s what you just applauded dear. Little girls that get pregnant at 13 in your lovely state will be forced to bear a child against their will. Nice.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this
Renee, don’t even let it get you riled up. satan - and his children (i.e. Chuck) - have a mission and it is to sow seeds of discord at every possible opportunity. Sons of satan don’t wait for you to disrespect them first. They are not defensive, but offensive. Don’t let them accomplish their mission. The Bible says to resist the devil and he will flee. Trust me, if you just ignore the son of satan, he will eventually move on to someone else.
Now that we all know what we’re dealing with, just ignore the devil and stomp him under your feet!
By Randy
February 24, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this
South Dakota is just the start, there are many other states that have similar bills in place and starting the process. With Alito and Roberts on the Supreme Court, baby murders will be cut back(but probably not entirely out). Sounds great to me. No one wants to tell women what to do with their bodies, we just want to protect unborn human beings, they should have rights also. Again, the law in my opinion should be, if you had unprotected sex of your own free will and you get pregnant, the innocent baby shouldn’t have to pay for your mistake. If you are raped etc. that’s a different story.
By Whiley
February 24, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this
Randy are you going to be the person to decide if a female was actually raped or not? What if birth control was used?
Forcing any female at any age to give birth IS RAPE !
Sometimes I really hate this friggin country & some of the friggin stupid people that live here.
By Whiley
February 24, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this
Randy, do you pay for the THOUSANDS of unwanted already born children currently residing just in the state of South Dakota?
idiot. a fetus is not a baby.
By Mara
February 24, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this
Randy, you idiot. Why don’t you do some research before spouting off. The SD law does not have an exception for rape or incest. Dumb a*. The only exception is to save the life of the woman. Not for rape, not for incest, not to protect the health of the mother. Get your facts straight.
By kimberly
February 24, 2006 10:46 AM | Link to this
Randy, if you are raped that’s a different story? REALLY? So….. a woman (or girl) would have to PROVE that for it to be okay with you? Uh-huh. How long does that usually take? Let’s see….
From RAINN.org:
One in six American women has been the victim of an attempted or completed rape, and 10% of sexual assault victims are men. In 2003-2004, there were an average annual 204,370 victims of rape, attempted rape or sexual assault. About 44% of rape victims are under age 18, and 80% are under age 30.
Probability of Arrest Analysis: >>If the rape is reported to police, there is a 50.8% chance that an arrest will be made. >>If an arrest is made, there is an 80% chance of prosecution. >>If there is a prosecution, there is a 58% chance of a felony conviction. >>If there is a felony conviction, there is a 69% chance the convict will spend time in jail.
So, even in those 28% of rapes that are reported to police, there is only a 16.3% chance the rapist will end up in prison. (WHAT TRIMESTER IS SHE IN NOW, RANDY?)
Factoring in unreported rapes, about 5%—one out of twenty— of rapists will ever spend a day in jail. 19 out of 20 will walk free.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 10:46 AM | Link to this
I say that if that’s what the people of South Dakota want, then who are we to be angry with them? Assuming their wishes are accurately represented by their local government, how can non-South Dakotans be angry?
Personally, I think it’ll just be a matter of time before they realize what a terrible mistake they’ve made. The betting is now open on how many women will die or be mutilated by black market or self-inflicted abortions before they reverse their decision.
By Work In Progress
February 24, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this
I think that both Chuck and JBM are acting like hypocrites. Both of you have issues that go against the teachings of Christ and yet you just want to call one another the devil and insult one another for the sin in the OTHER person’s life.
You BOTH need to look in the mirror before finding fault with someone else who follows Christ.
Chuck needs to study the apostles and how they witnessed to others if he wants to be a proper witness for Christ. And JBM needs to wake up to the fact that she is also living in sin. Sexual relations outside of marraige IS A SIN…gay or straight. Being gay is unacceptable to God, as are ANY sexual relations (or deviations) outside of marriage. You can’t change God to make Him into something acceptable to YOU.
Both JBM and Chuck need to stop the mud slinging and check their own eyes. Neither of you represent the Christ I know.
I’m not perfect either and have my own struggles. But I don’t sling mud at other followers (or non-followers) of Christ on a daily basis either. Please stop this relentless battle and name calling.
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this
Why are so many alledged Christians better at quoting from the O.T. and not from the New Testament? Just a thought. LOL
on that Asian script thought, I once had a shirt that had rather small blue Asian script all over it, on a white background. I worked at the time with Koreans, Chinese, and Japanese(and others). The Chinese and Japanese could not read it. Eventually I asked a Korean, she looked at it long and hard and said “It is Korean, but it is backwards”.
how was I to know? LMAO
way to go South Dakota, get that back-alley/clothes-hanger body count up.
By lozen
February 24, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this
Oh, Whiley. This is so sad. You are so right about what’s happening in South Dakota. The war is on against the right of women to make decisions about their bodies, their lives, their reproductive choices. Are women going to allow this to happen? The next few years are going to be tough. We fought so long and so hard to get abortion rights; this may bring us back out into the streets.
By Gob
February 24, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this
Randy, you wrote “if you had unprotected sex of your own free will and you get pregnant, the innocent baby shouldn’t have to pay for your mistake.”
Who exactly do you think is paying for that mistake when the mother is a 15 year-old crack addict? If anyone is paying for it, it is the baby. Also, the studies are pretty clear that a baby born to a mother who wanted an abortion has a very high probability of ending up in jail or at best, living in poverty. Please understand all of the ramifications of what you are advocating. Life doesnt occur in a vacuum.
By Renee
February 24, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this
Okay, I think my time on this blog is up.
I get tired of these self-righteous people blabbing and whining about what they think is sinful.
GET OVER IT AlREADY…gay people have been here since the beginning of time and will be here until the end of time, no matter what anybody thinks about it. SO what if you believe that it’s wrong, YOU’VE said that, over and over and over again. Nobody is converting to Christianity, and I for one am not giving up my lesbianism. That would be like asking me not to be black.
Maybe if people focused on some real issues other than homosexuality and abortion* there would be some much needed changes in the world.
I came on this blog for one reason, and one reason only. That was to express my feelings about issues, and have intelligent debates. While I have made many “blog friends” I have been disrespected and ridiculed etc.. and it has p** me off to no end.
I started off the day telling jokes…they say nobody should steal your joy….but…
By Gob
February 24, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this
For those interested in a more big picture look at some of the ramifications of banning abortion, read the chapter on crime in the book Freakonomics.
Legalized abortion is one of the primary reasons there has been such a huge decline in the crime rate since the 80’s. This is a controversial idea, but in the book, the numbers bear it out. Very good reading.
By Work In Progress
February 24, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this
It truly is sad that half the women in this country have been duped into believing that the horrendous act of paying some quack to pull your unborn baby out of you in pieces is your lawful RIGHT!
“I have the RIGHT to pay someone to KILL my child before it’s born! I am woman hear me roar!”
A nation that kills it’s most helpless-their unborn children-is a nation without hope.
A nation where women want to kill their own children is a nation to pity and fear.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this
WIP - Thank you for your input. However, let me point out that your opinions are just that, your opinion. I am hardly moved by a stranger’s idea of what is acceptable to God and what is not. I am even less moved by the opinion of a stranger who has obviously never studied Biblical texts in context and in its original languages.
As I’ve said many times in the past, you do not know what goes on in my bedroom, so the most you can do is ASSUME that I participate in sexual relations outside of marriage. I won’t even deal with the fact that you have no idea whether or not I’m married to my partner. Basically, dear, you know nothing about me except that I have a female partner.
At the same time, I am well aware of my faults, flaws, and sin. I am far from perfect, as most Christ-followers are. I don’t consider myself better than anyone, whether they believe in Christ and follow his teachings or not.
Secondly, I have never slung mud here or elsewhere. I have responded to Chuck’s evil behavior based in part on fact, and in part on my opinion. If you are a believer in the Bible then I assume you know how satan and his demons are described in the Bible. I assume you are familiar with their characteristics, and the type of work they do. It is a fact that Chuck’s behavior here on this blog is indicative of an intimate relationship with satan. It is my opinion that he is indeed one of satan’s sons (or demons). Based on his works, he is not an ambassador for Christ, but one for satan.
Until yesterday, I never judged the person you call Chuck. At worst, I thought he was a well-meaning judgmental jerk who just didn’t realize the damage he was doing.
I am now convinced that he really is in alignment with the mission of satan, and not the work of Christ. That demon you call Chuck is not a follower of Christ. And, I will continue to deal with him as such.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this
And one more dang-blasted thing.
I’m really sick and tired of folks using all these wimpy scaredy-cat aliases.
If you’re a “regular,” and you have something to say, use your regular tag. Say what you gotta say, and stand by it.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this
Julia, I mean WIP, go take a chill pill.
By Whiley
February 24, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this
lozen, we have to pay more attention to who we vote into office & why. It’s sad but I feel anybody that’s a religious nut should NOT be in any elected office. It’s gotten to that.
By Archie
February 24, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this
“Chuck you can kiss the crack of my black A-S-S and lick every piece of S-H-I-T I deposit there.”
That statement was rough Renee. I am going to tell you right now that I will steal your statement(laugh)!! I don’t mean to offend anyone by making light of it but it does have a certain flavor.
By Whiley
February 24, 2006 11:19 AM | Link to this
Work in Progress? Hardly. and BTW, a fetus IS NOT A BABY ! ! ! Are you a man without a uterus?
How many unwanted ALREADY BORN KIDS do you have?
Here’s your solution?: Randy can be in charge of the rape court. He’ll decide which female was raped or not. (decisions will be based on her knowledge of the bible, what style clothes she wears, & if she’s a virgin or not) Chuck can be in charge of the statewide forced pregnancy prison. All pregnancies will be monitored. Julia will be in charge of the new daily mandatory abstinence classes. This course will start in elementary school & go through all the way to 12th grade. Hopefully with enough negativity & fear, all girls will feel too bad about themselves & feel such utter disgust with their body parts that they will too ashamed of themselves to experiment with their sexuality. (lets hope) Boys aren’t required to takes these classes.
Now, all the rest of us, will have to flip the bill & care for all the thousands of unwanted children per year that will still be born despite all their efforts.
You religious fetus freaks are so weird.
By kimberly
February 24, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this
Finally, some good-sense legislation! Hahahaha!
By Julia
February 24, 2006 11:27 AM | Link to this
Whiley- I don’t want to or need to move anywhere thank you very much. And I have as much right to speak my mind as you do. I see, anyone who believes in Christ and is against abortion is a religious nutjob. You’re too kind,really.
And how in the world do you equate making abortion illegal with “all the female children would end up child wives & pregnant by 13”? The moment abortion becomes illegal all girls up to the age of 13 would become pregnant? Your statement makes no sense.
Do you know how few girls that age get pregnant or have abortions? Do you know that tha majority of abortions are on women over 21 years old?
Abortion is being used 95% of the time for birth control and you know it. Using these rare hard case scenarios doesn’t justify the millions aborted due to being an “inconvenient” pregnancy. It’s wrong to kill a child-no matter what. Don’t talk to me about the rare instance of a 13 year old. Talk to me about the 25 year olds that make up the majority of abortants.
It’s Friday and I’m not looking for a knock down drag out today. My friend lost her husband and she’s 5 months pregnant. Another friend just found out her baby has birth defects and might not live to see his first birthday. It’s been a rough week and I might have to save this discussion for another time.
I’d rather read the jokes today and try not to dwell on any problems or serious issues. Tomorrow’s another day. Maybe someone else can debate this today but I’ll pass. I’m just not up to it right now. Sorry.
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 11:29 AM | Link to this
Now, all the rest of us, will have to flip the bill & care for all the thousands of unwanted children per year that will still be born despite all their efforts.
we got prisons for them, eventually. Haliburton might even be the contractor for building and operating.
Okay, what does South Dakota produce? Tons of wheat, feeder calves for beef lots, dairy heifers for mostly export. Did I miss anything? LOL
I once walked onto a Flying Tigers DC-8 that was being used to ship Holstein heifers to Brazil. It smelled like a barn 1 foot into the galley area, right behind the cockpit.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this
That was hilarious, Kimberly! Good for him!
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this
air of overconfidence to mask their insecurities.”
sound familiar? LMAO
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this
Sounds like a classic case of “I can dish it but I can’t take it.”
By Jack K
February 24, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this
Gob, it’s also the reason social security is going bust. 45 million people that would have paid into it were aborted over the last 30 years or so.
By Archie
February 24, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this
How can I find out about the South Dakota story? I have been looking.. Also I already asked JBM about sex-before-marriage thing weeks ago and she answered it fine, but I would like to ask those that shack up and go to church, how do you get around the sex before marriage thing and be christian?
By Sanhan
February 24, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this
Since the term abortion is medical refers to both spontaneous and induced, no one can ever completely eliminate abortion.
The issue in South Dakota does beg some deeper questions. Will all women who have miscarriages need to be investigated to see if they have caused them to happen? If one assumes that a fertilized egg is human life and a death occurs at any stage, one would presume that an autopsy would need to be done to make sure there was “murder” committed. Who would pay for all this investigation? Would women who have more than one miscarriage be more suspect than others? What if a woman has spoken out as a pro-choice advocate, and becomes pregnant and has a miscarriage; would she be suspected of murder? Is this an issue of free speech? Will women be more or less likely to seek prenatal care under these circumstances? Can you make prenatal care mandatory? Who will pay for it if the woman can’t? Could women be barred from certain activities that would harm the fetus, say skiing? What if a woman needs lifesaving medication that is harmful to the fetus? Will she be required to stop taking it? The woman may die without her medication. Could she be forced on life support to save the fetus? I don’t know about whether South Dakota has a high cancer rate, but pregnancy places women with cancer in more danger. The hormones and growth chemicals that help the fetus develop also help cancer cells and tumors grow more rapidly. While there are documented cases of women delivering healthy babies after undergoing chemotherapy, many women will miscarry spontaneously, or their cancers will grow and spread, lowering their life expectancy. This is particularly grievous when there are other children in the family, and for all left behind.
My reasons for supporting safe, legal abortion are a little different than a very young woman’s, but safe abortion is necessary for the well-being of all women and their families at every age.
I’m 44, the same age as my mother was when she died. Many friends my age are still at risk for pregnancy. I say at risk because pregnancy could indeed jeaopardize their lives, with issues like severe hypertension, or multiple sclerosis, cervical cancer. They all have children. They’re all married in stable relationships, and thus are sexually active. Every reasonable adult knows that birth control methods fail, and some are simply not used because of their risk. My friend’s cervical cancer was discovered because of her pregnancy.
I was 12 when my mother died suddenly. Though she was not pregnant, a pregnancy at that point in her life would have been extremely dangerous; if she had carried it to term, she would have left a baby behind in addition to my sister, 16, and me. We did not have any close family members to help us out.
I would not subject anyone to this kind of life-altering event, especially on the heels of devastating and debiliatating illnesses.
The responsbility of motherhood, whether embraced enthusiastically or reluctantly, is deeply personal and cannot be state or federally mandated. The cries of joy from those who celebrate fewer “baby murders” may be inflicting another kind of death, the death of families, in circumstances that are frankly none of their business.
From where I’m standing, legal abortion is a pro-family issue.
Namaste all.
By Julia
February 24, 2006 11:43 AM | Link to this
Just Being Me-Excuse me? WIP? I don’t think I’ve ever said anything here to offend you and if I did I’m sorry. But I’m not this WIP person. What did I say to offend you? Nothing I hope. :)
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this
Archie - ABC news site, right hand side. top, has a link.
By candide
February 24, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this
Which one of your neighbors do you think should have the right to tell you what to do with your body: when and whom to screw; whether to use birth control or not; whether to give birth or not.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this
Archie, although I’m not interested in getting into the discussion, and I definitely don’t support premarital sex, or “shacking,” I want to point out that marriage is not as cut and dry as the piece of paper you get at the court house. One need only look at marriages in biblical times and/or during slavery to see exactly what I mean.
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this
If we are going to be getting walnut-sized fetuses as children, can they be counted in the census, something the Founding Fathers seemed to have overlooked when calculating Congressional representation.
Where’s a good Constitional-Literalist when you need one? LOL
By Whiley
February 24, 2006 11:52 AM | Link to this
Julia, Anyone that wishes to not agree with abortion has the right to not have one. Anyone that wishes to have that right taken away from everybody is forcing pregnancy on each & every female that has intercourse within her lifetime. Over a lifetime there’s good chance at least one pregnancy may occur that’s unwanted. Birth control fails, rape is all too common, women get caught up in love, lust & whatever JUST LIKE MEN DO.
Just because a female is over 18 does not mean forced pregnancy is justifiable. Using abortion as birth control comment is & has always been an IGNORANT comment. Women don’t want to have to get an abortion, they want to NOT BE PREGNANT. Women don’t enjoy getting an abortion. It’s expensive, mildly painful & it can be difficult to get away from work & or kids you already have to get it done. Women just want to enjoy their sexuality without being punished for it. Men aren’t punished for theirs no matter how many children they father. Not allowing grown women abortions is just plain punishment for having sex out of some whacked out religious guidelines.
Sorry about your friends.
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this
As so many on here have pointed out, abortion and gay-rights are just the two current hot-button topics. If there were no more abortions and all gays were stoned-to-death, the ReligiouslySuperior would only find some new topic to enforce on others.
or as I always like to very sarcastically say: “Freedom of Religion(or lack of it) is a great idea just as long as you look at everything MY way”.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this
Julia, you mean you’re not WIP? Okay, then my apologies. His/her first post sounded a lot like you, and by the second one I was convinced. Obviously, I was wrong so I apologize.
By Mara
February 24, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this
Archie, for a good take on the SD law, paste this into your address bar - http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php storyId=5231140 Washington Post also has a fairly comprehensive article on it.
By Zack
February 24, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this
Brian Curtis—I saw your post about Islam and will give you some examples by Monday, when I have more time. In fact, I might be able to do so later today, but Monday is more likely.
In the meantime, why don’t YOU try to DEFEND Islam? Good luck. If you’re believing what the media tells you about that religion, you’re being very naive. I don’t hate muslims or anyone else; I hate what that religion stands for.
You say you don’t regard a fetus as a human being? There’s not a sonogram in the world that would support your statement, so what in the world are you going to do for “evidence”? Once conception occurs, we are not to tamper with that life.
I hope everyone here has a good weekend.
By The72John
February 24, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this
yay. Abortion again. If it’s not one thing it’s your mother.
Julia, the thing that continues to escape you and Randy and satan and the other religious fanatics on this blog is that YOU DON’T HAVE TO HAVE AN ABORTION IF YOU DON’T WANT TO. That’s your perogative. Stop trying to control everyone’s life based on your narrow religious beliefs.
Just - stop it! You aren’t God!
By chuck
February 24, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this
Renee, when did I disrespect you? I have never to my knowledge ever mentioned your name in a post. If I did it would have been months ago.
By Archie
February 24, 2006 12:00 PM | Link to this
Thanks Chilao.
“In my opinion, it is the time for the South Dakota Legislature to deal with this issue and protect the lives and rights of unborn children,” said Sen. Julie Bartling, a Democrat and the bill’s main sponsor.
Notice that a Democrat is the bill’s main sponsor. That’s why I say I am not liberal for the sake of being liberal. Notice that is a woman that is the bill’s main sponsor and that is why I have a problem with male-bashing. I have said many times that a commonsenser should be a political party. The women here already this but hello,maybe the problem with this issue is women. Can you guys come to a consensus? I mean as men we do some dumb stuff because we don’t go through what you(women) go through but we can comprehend consistency.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this
Renee, that’s bait. Resist the devil and he will flee.
By Mara
February 24, 2006 12:10 PM | Link to this
Chilao, forget the census. Can I claim a fetus on my taxes, that’s what I want to know! If it’s a “person” and I’m giving it nourishment and shelter, shouldn’t I be able to write the little bugger off? One more question to those forum members who believe that a fetus is a baby - why do you celebrate birth-days instead of conception-days? After all, if the kid is “alive” from the moment of conception, you should be honest and celebrate its first year of life only 90 days (assuming a full nine month gestation) after birth…right?
By Archie
February 24, 2006 12:13 PM | Link to this
Thanks Mara. Wow! what an article on the South Dakota law!
This country is going to the Taliban.
By Archie
February 24, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this
“Archie, although I’m not interested in getting into the discussion, and I definitely don’t support premarital sex, or “shacking,â€? I want to point out that marriage is not as cut and dry as the piece of paper you get at the court house. One need only look at marriages in biblical times and/or during slavery to see exactly what I mean.”
I don’t have a problem with your responses JBM. I was trying get back at the christian folk because we all know people that fornicate so I was trying to point out that no one judges them the way they judge gays. I hope everyone understands I am not in the judging business.
By chuck
February 24, 2006 12:20 PM | Link to this
Bite me JBM
I really want to know Renee. When JBM ticked me off yesterday, basically accusing me of using a racist slur toward her when I had no idea it was equivalent to “boy”. I went off on HER. I have never done that with you. You have always been respectful toward me and frankly, we haven’t talked back and forth very much. I’m just wondering why that changed all of a sudden.
By kimberly
February 24, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this
Sanhan, as always, the most reasonable voice around. Thank you. I also wondered about having members of the Sheriff’s office coming around to interview women who have miscarriages. Not only, “How much would that cost?” But, “How deeply would that destroy the relationship between law enforcement and regular, law-abiding citizens?” Regardless of how you feel about the medical procedure, putting more laws on it is NO GOOD FOR ANYBODY.
By Mara
February 24, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this
Speaking of “christian folk” and their assumption of Christian superiority over the Muslim belief system (yes, Zack. I’m talking about you…) Here’s the latest from Nigeria -
As the city’s thousands of surviving Muslims struggled to return to their northern homes or huddled at police stations, Christian residents expressed little remorse for their role in five days of religious violence. At (the towns’) ruined central mosque, one of two reportedly destroyed Tuesday, Ifeanyi Eze, 34, picked up a piece of charred wood and scrawled on a wall: “Muhammad is a man but Jesus is from above.” Muslim refugees, mostly from the Hausa ethnic group of northern Nigeria, described how mobs of Christian men wielding guns and machetes burst into shops, looted goods and money, then began attacking. The Muslims fled on foot, mostly across the bridge over the wide Niger River. Some were caught, cut to death and burned. Others, said survivors, were thrown into the river. A few yards from the corpse of a charred man, lying naked on his back in the middle of the road, a group of Onitsha traders said they had no choice but to attack the Muslims living here.. “It is a shame to us if we don’t kill them.”
Nice. Onward “christian” soldiers..
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this
Oh, I understood perfectly well where you were coming from, Archie. No problems. We’re cool. I just wanted to point out that a lot of people don’t believe in the concept of marriage that our society holds today, so what looks like shacking is not always shacking.,,
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 12:34 PM | Link to this
Renee, DON’T BITE… you’ll recall that I told satan that he didn’t know me and that we weren’t friends so I didn’t want him addressing me as though we were. You’ll recall that it had little, if anything, to do with his race initially and didn’t become a matter of race until he began to use the term disrespecfully and in a derogatory fashion - although you understand that it can be offensive for a white man to call a black woman “girl,” especially when he doesn’t know her. But, either way, only gay guys call women “girl” anyway, so you and I both know that right now, satan (and the bride of satan) has more important things to worry about.
Anyway, satan obviously doesn’t remember that he called you “haughty.” Either he forgot, or he considered that a compliment and not an insult. Either way, ignore him and his bait. Remember what the Bible says: Resist the devil and he will flee.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 12:36 PM | Link to this
LOL @ onward Christian soldiers.
By chuck
February 24, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this
What kind of drugs are you on jbm aka “just born malignant”? I have never called Renee haughty or any other name. You have some serious mental health issues.
By Whiley
February 24, 2006 12:45 PM | Link to this
How much obvious proof is it going to take for everybody to realize that anything based on any religion is corrupt, violent, selfish, damning & distructive?
I mean geesh ! You know how sexually repressive with pent up perversions most of those people are? Do you really think they should be regulating everybodys sex lives? It’s no wonder religious groups are going nuts all over the world.
By kimberly
February 24, 2006 12:47 PM | Link to this
Chuck, what did you post at 9:53 this morning?
By The72John
February 24, 2006 12:48 PM | Link to this
One wonder’s what kind of twisted worldview would lead anyone to call JBM malignant, particularly when the person making the claim has shown about as much human compassion and caring as a rabid wolverine.
By The72John
February 24, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this
One also wonders why said individual would have a hard time understanding that when he insults a particular group of people, that he is insulting ALL of those people, even when he doesn’t call them by name.
It’s like saying “Jews killed Jesus and are all doomed to Hell” and then saying “But Jewish and Proud Of It, I’ve never insulted YOU. Why are you mad?”
Talk about not knowing your a-s-s from a hole in the ground.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 12:53 PM | Link to this
Sure, satan, that was your alter ego who posted at 9:53. Oh, wait… that’s not it. You were under the influence of satan, right? It wasn’t you, but the spirit who lives within you. LOL!!!
Whatever devil. Get thee hence. In other words, go to hell.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this
Don’t blame him, John. It’s the devil inside. He can’t help it.
I predict he’ll deny posting that 9:53. I guess it’s easier than acknowledging your anti-Christ behavior and apologizing for it.
By FatMoose
February 24, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this
I’m just wondering why that changed all of a sudden.
Um, Your insanity bubbling to surface is what suddenly happens…each minute of each day…
By chuck
February 24, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this
Haughty women like JBM, Renee, lozen, kimberly need to be smited with scabs on their heads and the uncovering of their private parts. The Bible says so.
But we are SURE you meant that in a good way, right?
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 01:05 PM | Link to this
Mara - taxes? yeah that’s a good one. LOL Write your South Dakota representative? or spread the word in SD that is the new lobbying effort?
I’m getting ready to write mine over taxes, or more correctly the new form of filings, but not a topic for here/today.
By chuck
February 24, 2006 01:10 PM | Link to this
That’s right jelly brain mutant,
My big faux pas was:
You are completely out of touch with the reality of scripture. Your skull must be several inches thick if you can’t understand the concept of a God who is both loving and merciful on the one hand but who is also JUST. For all of the verses you can pull out of context in scripture talking about God’s love, I can show you the verses of His JUDGEMENT. They go together hand in hand. Read the BIBLE girl, not the homosexual manifesto.
It had no connotations of ANY kind. Then you went ballistic with your little demand in which you said:
Do not EVER, EVER call me “girl� again. You do not know me and we are not friends or siblings. I don’t give a flying fig what context it was in, or how comfortable you felt with me at the moment. YOU DON’T KNOW ME. Don’t call me “girl.�
Now you should certainly know how I am going to respond to something like that…by being a smart butt and egging you on. Then you came out with the so-called racial aspect of it that I have never heard in my entire life of over 40 years (a position BTW that was echoed by Jack). You know good and well that the term was only used the first time INNOCENTLY and that It was not intended to do anything to harm you. After that I was messing with you because of your little demand.
Had you just asked me not to use it I would have apologized and that would have been the end of it, but you decied you wanted to get a rise out of me and you did. You are a manipulative litlle prima donna who has to have everything her way. Can’t ever admit to being wrong. You should be ashamed of yourself for your little displays. When you stop living in SIN, maybe you’ll be able to recognize the difference between right and wrong.
By chuck
February 24, 2006 01:15 PM | Link to this
I didn’t post ANYTHING at 9:53. I was in a parent conference at 9:53.
By Renee
February 24, 2006 01:16 PM | Link to this
LOL too funny…the 9:50 was not you Chuck?
By chuck
February 24, 2006 01:20 PM | Link to this
That does explain the venom though. I did call you a “miscreant” or something months ago, and I apologized for it. You can believe what you want to believe about the 9:53, but it wasn’t me. I have never posted in any name but my own but there have been at least 3-4 occasions where someone posted in MY name. This is one of those.
By chuck
February 24, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this
No renee it absolutely was not.
By kimberly
February 24, 2006 01:22 PM | Link to this
Chuck, why did you start in all nasty on us this morning? (9:53) You know, when you said our private parts should be uncovered? Did Jesus tell you to do that? Just curious.
By kimberly
February 24, 2006 01:26 PM | Link to this
Let’s have another parent conference right now, Chuck: STAY AWAY FROM MY KIDS, you PERV. Capice? If I ever see you around ANY children, I’m calling the cops.
By chuck
February 24, 2006 01:26 PM | Link to this
Read the post again Kimberly. You can’t honestly believe that that was ANYTHING like what I would write.
By FatMoose
February 24, 2006 01:27 PM | Link to this
but you decied you wanted to get a rise out of me and you did. You are a manipulative litlle prima donna who has to have everything her way.
See. It is not his fault that he is a bitter/angry/bigotted mess! It is ours bc we MAKE him do/say these things;)
You have a choice CHUCK - that is the first lesson in the book you know sooooooo well…
By The72John
February 24, 2006 01:29 PM | Link to this
You are a manipulative litlle prima donna who has to have everything her way. Can’t ever admit to being wrong. You should be ashamed of yourself for your little displays. When you stop living in SIN, maybe you’ll be able to recognize the difference between right and wrong.
My, my, the stones are certainly flying from Chuck’s hand today, aren’t they! The spiteful little worm just can’t handle it when people give back to him what he heaps on others.
I just feel sorry for his wife - after being spoken to harshly by someone who is A) gay B) a woman and C) black, Chuck is sure to have some serious spousal abuse to dish out tonight. Let’s hope supper’s on the table as soon as he gets home!
JBM, don’t excuse the evil that is Chuck by blaming the devil…he’s just a bad human being with no redeeming qualities. Trash is trash.
By Renee
February 24, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this
If in fact it was not you, then I refer to JBM’s 11:11 post
If you’re a “regular,� and you have something to say, use your regular tag. Say what you gotta say, and stand by it.
I would say I apologize for the comment, but it still stands to whoever made it under your name. I’m sure you can understand the anger being directed to you, since your name was attached.
By Renee
February 24, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this
LOL John. If that was not you Chuck, yes it does sound like something you would have said.
By kimberly
February 24, 2006 01:49 PM | Link to this
Why would I honestly believe ANYTHING from anybody, Chuck? Hahaha! Knowing what I know about men like you…. What, I should TRUST you now? Hahaha! Really.
By chuck
February 24, 2006 01:50 PM | Link to this
72, I don’t mind the garbage for something I said, in fact I stand behind everything I say, though I sometimes have to apologize for HOW I say it, unlike the weak little spineless maggot that posted under my name.
You don’t have to apologize to me Renee. I would have been ticked if someone had referred to me in that way. You should know from my posts that I have never posted anything that was nasty (at least in the prurient sense of the word).
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this
Now you should certainly know how I am going to respond to something like that…by being a smart butt and egging you on.
Yes, now that I know you are the son of satan, I do certainly know how you would respond.
Before, I was thinking you were a Christian, so no, I did not expect that sort of a reaction.
The INITIAL comment was rude, but I assumed that you didn’t realize that, so I told you not to ever call me that again.
All that Christ in you encouraged you to be provocative and rude and sarcastic (and did I say PROVOCATIVE), which led me to realize that I’m not dealing with some well-meaning guy who just doesn’t know any better.
You, satan, are a calculating, hateful, provocative, rude, demonic being who seeks to do nothing but wreak havoc and disturb peace.
GO TO HELL where you belong.
By Brian Curtis
February 24, 2006 01:55 PM | Link to this
Folks… you’re talking to the troll. Chuck has proven what he really is, and the only sensible course of action is to ignore him and move on.
Joke time! There’ll be plenty of time to rave about abortion NEXT week.
How many members of the Bush administration does it take to change a light bulb?
Answer: Ten in all…
One to deny that a light bulb needs to be changed; One to attack the patriotism of anyone who says the light bulb needs to be changed; One to blame Clinton for burning out the light bulb; One to arrange the invasion of a country rumored to have a secret stockpile of light bulbs; One to give a billion dollar no-bid contract to Halliburton for the new light bulb; One to arrange a photograph of Bush, dressed as a janitor, standing on a step ladder under the banner: Light Bulb Change Accomplished; One administration insider to resign and write a book documenting in detail how Bush was literally in the dark; One to viciously smear the previous one; One surrogate to campaign on TV and at rallies on how George Bush has had a strong light-bulb-changing policy all along; And finally, one to confuse Americans about the difference between screwing a light bulb and screwing the country.By chuck
February 24, 2006 01:59 PM | Link to this
That’s fine Kim…It doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of things. I think if you look at it carefully it sounds more like something 72john or candide/norman would say being smart alecks than what I would say. Whatever.
By The72John
February 24, 2006 02:06 PM | Link to this
Gee, anyone imagine that I wouldn’t tell chuck directly what I thought of him? No need to hide behind his name, dirtying myself in the process, in order to get my point across.
By chuck
February 24, 2006 02:07 PM | Link to this
Just Being a Mental case, AKA bride of satan, Your mama must have been a fertilizer maker since you are so full of crap. You were able to put up a good front for a while but your true colors are emerging. Keep up the good work. You are displaying such a changed life.
By kimberly
February 24, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this
I might believe you didn’t say that, Chuck, but I’d still never trust you…. if that makes you feel any better. (I really AM just TOO f-ing nice.)
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this
You should know from my posts that I have never posted anything that was nasty (at least in the prurient sense of the word).
It is definitely not nasty to ridicule a person’s masculinity, or to hurl any sort of stereotypical insults at a person based on their sexuality, or to call a person a depraved miscreant, or to make unfounded claims that a person left their husband or couldn’t keep a man, or to say anything along the lines of “bite me”… and that’s just based on memory. God only knows what I would come up with if I took the time to search the archives.
Nah, you’ve never said anything nasty. You disgusting trollish demon.
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this
With the fascination with ‘scabs’ and all that, sounds like something that little K9ScatBoy would say, maybe he was trying to get past the successful blocking, but I digress. Since there is now a time-delay I think posts are being reviewed by a human before actually posting.
gotta admit it is pretty low, to post under another person’s name.
By kimberly
February 24, 2006 02:13 PM | Link to this
GOOD JOKE, BRIAN!
By chuck
February 24, 2006 02:14 PM | Link to this
JBM, I’m beginning to think you have a reading comprehension problem. I said that I had never said anything nasty IN THE PRURIENT SENSE OF THE WORD. I DID NOT DENY SAYING MEAN THINGS.
But then if you didn’t put a different slant on my posts than reality, you wouldn’t be just being a maniac.
By Archie
February 24, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this
Chuck I used to have a value system very similar to yours. Chuck you have to make a comeback and understand some folk are atheist so quoting scripture has zero meaning and Chuck you must understand that people simply don’t view the Bible in a traditional sense. College was the first time that I was exposed atheism and my views have become more non-traditional over the years. A friend of mine was talking about judgemental christians and shacking last night and that’s why I brought it up today to see if the christian would be judgemental today. I am curious about about marriage in the sense that JBM mentioned,although,she does not want to discuss it,I am curious about different religious views although I don’t plan to change church’s. As a christian I know we have to follow some rules and I want to make sure I can come close to being right. Some things I can’t do as married guy and be right but other things are just based on tradition. This is why I ask JBM questions because I want to learn and Chuck,as christians, we need to learn because no human has died and then came back and said “this is the plan”. I was excluding Jesus in the previous statement of course.
By The72John
February 24, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this
Chuck-the-troll accusing others of showing their true colors? Accusing others of being a maniac? Wow, that’s just hilarious. Frankly, if being anything at all like Chuck is “demonstrating a changed life”, I’ll have nothing of it.
Who Would Jesus Slam, Chuck? Who Would Jesus Ridicule? Who Would Jesus Kill, Chuck? I’m sure you know the answers to these questions.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 02:21 PM | Link to this
LOLOLOL!!! Now the judgmental, finger-pointing, splinter-pulling Christian wants to talk about my mother… okay! LOL!
This is too funny!
For the record, I’ve never put up a front, and anyone who’s been here for any length of time knows that. As I said from my first day on this blog: I am just being me. And, whoever likes it likes it, and whoever doesn’t doesn’t.
I do my best to be as much like Christ as I possibly can, and I don’t look down on those who reject Christ. I don’t judge those who don’t believe in Him or even those who ridicule him. I don’t even judge the ones who claim to preach in His name, but are really wolves in sheeps’ clothing.
See, I don’t judge because I make mistakes too. I screw up alllll the time. Every day. I say things I shouldn’t have said. Think things I shouldn’t have thought. I’m far from perfect, and don’t pretend to be.
I don’t ever have to worry about the true me “emerging” because I’m already OUT (pardon the pun). Everyone here has seen me falter. Everyone has seen me lose my temper, and turn around and apologize. Everyone has seen me say things I shouldn’t have said, and then humbly do my best to make it right.
You on the other hand, as I would expect of satan, simply justify your wrong by adding more insults and epithets.
GO TO HELL, SATAN.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 02:25 PM | Link to this
I DID NOT DENY SAYING MEAN THINGS.
Hmm, interesting. So, satan, have you apologized for all the mean things you’ve said? Or just that one where you called Kimberly a depraved, little miscreant? Because, surely you know that a true Christ-follower would have done everything possible to undo any damage he had caused with his “saying mean things.”
And, for the record, referring to a person’s sexuality is definitely saying something nasty in a prurient sense.
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this
Yeah, Thanks BC, that is going into an email(to send)
aside: so much for it being Joke Day, huh? I was a’tryin’ earlier. LOL
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this
You, satan, are a calculating, hateful, provocative, rude, demonic being who seeks to do nothing but wreak havoc and disturb peace.
Just felt like saying it again.
By blablabla
February 24, 2006 02:30 PM | Link to this
hello, everyone. glad to see i haven’t missed much. lol. can we get back to the jokes? and btw, where do all you guys get all your jokes? i feel like everybody around here but me is a veritable fountain of good material. where’s it all come from?
chilao - keep posting the new rules, buddy. good stuff. and i’m glad carlin or whoever it was figured out the solution to SS, since i sure don’t have it. lol.
By The72John
February 24, 2006 02:31 PM | Link to this
Right on! Let’s tell mama jokes.
Chuck’s mama is SOOO stupid that when he was born she didn’t drown him in a sack.
Ok, now you.
By kimberly
February 24, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this
Archie, I’ll bite. Just because fornication is [usually] pleasurable, doesn’t mean it’s the only reason people fornicate. People do it because, like hunger, the need can blind every other sense and every rational thought until it is filled. People do it because they believe they are in a loving relationship that will someday be honored with marriage, but it isn’t practical yet. People do it because they need love, not just sex, but a human connection, right here, right now, or they can’t go on. People do it because the person they intended to love, honor, and cherish forever left them or tortured them into leaving. People do it because they believe the need is a PART of them, as the creator made us, and they don’t know what else to do. People do it because they’ve learned that those sacred marriage vows don’t really mean that much afterall, and that divorce is expensive, and that it’s better to learn from mistakes than to repeat them. Some people would RATHER do it within the bonds of marriage, but a—h—-s (like Georgia voters) prevent them from doing so because they somehow think it’s their business to dictate whom you can and cannot love. People do it because, beyond a certain age, it’s just stupid to be a virgin of what you really need is love. Some people do it because they realize the idea that “SOMEDAY the Lord will make it okay” is a lie. People think: We get older, then we die. Why not live while we’re alive? What else were we created to do?
By Julia
February 24, 2006 02:39 PM | Link to this
72-so if you’re a Christian and are pro-life then that makes you a “fanatic”?
Your reasoning of “YOU DON’T HAVE TO HAVE AN ABORTION IF YOU DON’T WANT TO” could be used for the rest of the crimes in the world. Just because I don’t like for children to be killed doesn’t mean I can stop it from happening, right? If I don’t like it then I shouldn’t kill any right? If I don’t like robbery then I have the right not to rob anyone right? If I don’t like child abuse then I shouldn’t abuse my child. Because I don’t have the right to tell anyone else what to do right? As long as it doesn’t have a DIRECT impact on MY life then I shouldn’t worry about innocent children being killed?
I never said I was God. But we still have a need for laws that protect the innocent. You can do ANYTHING you want to or with your own body-as long as it doesn’t infringe on someone else’s rights. Ending another person’s life is obviously the biggest ingringement that there is.
By the way, please don’t lump me in with any religious fanatic. I don’t strap on explosive devices nor have I said anything hateful to anyone on this blog for having beliefs (in any subject) that are different from mine. And no I don’t go around blowing up abortion clinics.
You steroetype anything and everything that takes Christ’s name don’t you? As much as you detest homosexual stereotyping you sure are good are applying it to religious folks.
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 02:41 PM | Link to this
Blah - it was Target, that good ole American ingenuity, that figured it out. LOL
New Rule: Ladies, leave your eyebrows alone. Here’s how much men care about your eyebrows: do you have two of them? Okay, we’re done.
By Scalia
February 24, 2006 02:41 PM | Link to this
Where are all of the jokes? Why are people still fighting? As the Jack said, using Will and Grace’s puppy, “Please stop all of the fighting.”
As for Work in Progress, or WIP, that was Zack. He using the same tired, party line: “KILLING OF INNOCENT BABIES” with every abortion post.
Now I have an idea. How about South Dakota decide that every woman, since she has to carry the baby to term, has to marry the guy that impregnated her. So that means that every rich girl that goes “slumming”, dates a guy that the parents don’t approve of, has to marry the guy.
The bill wouldn’t last a year.
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this
this one does sound like Maher.
New Rule: Stop saying that teenage boys who have sex with their hot, blonde teachers are permanently damaged. I have a better description for these kids: lucky bastards.
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this
and this one is so true:
New Rule: If you’re going to insist on making movies based on crappy, old television shows, then you have to give everyone in the Cineplex a remote so we can see what’s playing on the other screens. Let’s remember the reason something was a television show in the first place is that the idea wasn’t good enough to be a movie.
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this
Sex, like food, is a very basic need. which of course is why it is so heavily regulated by religion.
By FatMoose
February 24, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this
Julia,
Ending another person’s life is obviously the biggest infringement that there is.
One must be absurdly ignorant to not be able to realize that there is no conclusive real-world evidence that a fetus has a soul - THAT IS BASED ON FAITH. And therefore has no place in law, since you cannot state that the fetus has a soul and IS being deprived of life (one must first exist before one can be deprived of something).
I agree, that if there is real-world proof one day that shows a fetus has a soul; this issue WILL have to be revisited.
But until then, people that (attempt to) legislate something on what they call a FACT where-as it really is FAITH; you will be, rightly so, disliked in a country that bases its legal system on (verifiable and living) human rights.
It is called DOGMA - the assertion of faith into law - and it will not occur here (america) easily.
You participate in this process that necessitates ignorance and the proliferation of it coupled by the submission of truth and honesty.
By The72John
February 24, 2006 03:02 PM | Link to this
Your assumption that a life is being taken is based on your religious convicitions, Julia. Murder and other crimes are obviously perpetrated against living, breathing human beings. Many people do not believe that a newly-fertilized egg is anything other than a self-replicating, self-organizing clump of cells that might as easily be turned into, say, skin cells.
A zygote isn’t an innocent. It isn’t an anything. Only in the hysterical minds of religious fanatics is a soul imbued into a seconds-old clump of cells. It may shock you to discover that I personally don’t agree with second- or third- term abortions, or even agree period with using abortion as a substitute for birth control. But I don’t try to force everyone else to toe that line because it’s not my business.
If you think that bestowing “personhood” upon a zygote ISN’T religious, you are kidding yourself.
You steroetype anything and everything that takes Christ’s name don’t you? As much as you detest homosexual stereotyping you sure are good are applying it to religious folks.
You are very wrong, dear. It’s people like you, who assume you speak for Christ, that I take issue with. There are many, many, many good people of faith in this world, and none of them presume to judge other people. You have proven not to be among this group. Play the “persecuted Christian” card somewhere else, nutcase.
By kimberly
February 24, 2006 03:06 PM | Link to this
So true, Chilao. I was trying to point out that people don’t do it as a rejection of their religious beliefs. They just do it because they have to — because they’re human. The question, “How do you justify doing that if you’re a Christian?” misses the whole point of WHY people do it.
By chuck
February 24, 2006 03:09 PM | Link to this
Archie, I have a tremendous amount of respect for the way you do things. I wish I was more like you in that respect. you remind me a lot of my Dad because you show a great amount of calm and maturity. You don’t let things rattle you. I’m sure we disagree on a lot of things but we can do so agreeably. Part of that is that you don’t take many stands on issues and that’s fine.
JBM drives me a little over the edge because she spends so much of her energy denying the truth of scripture. When you challenge her on it, she never addresses the issue, she goes off on a tangential issue, claims superiority, and then starts foaming at the mouth. I know that I should not respond to her the way that I do sometimes…that’s my own character flaw. I have a hard time letting things go. My Mother used to say that I would argue with a fence post. My temperament is a little bit like the Apostle Peter when he cut off the ear of one of those who came to arrest Christ. I’m a little impulsive. I’m not making excuses, it’s just the way I am and I do need to make some changes.
I teach over 150 kids every day and I see the moral decay that our country is in right now. It’s been building for the past 20 years. Some of the things they tell me about their parents and other adults in their lives would curl your toes. The blog is a way for me to blow off a little steam during the day…sometimes innapropriately. I know you wouldn’t believe it from the responses I get from the crowd here, but my students love me to death. I get better results from them than anybody in the school as far as behavior and academics go because I am firm, fair and consistent. When I tell them something they know that I mean it. When they have problems, they know I won’t let it go until it is solved. I hold them to a higher standard and they appreciate it.
Archie I really do believe that there are moral absolutes and that God is going to hold us accountable. You may or may not believe it, but I do. If I see people bound for HELL, I can’t just sit by and watch them fall into the abyss, I have to do something. I honestly don’t think that there is anything ANYBODY could say would change that for some of these folks, but there may be others who read the posts but don’t ever respond who may be reached.
Anyway, I hope you have a great weekend Archie. God Bless You.
By The72John
February 24, 2006 03:16 PM | Link to this
I’m sure that Chuck’s “good” students do like him. You know, white, Christian, male. I’m equally sure that any child that exhibits tendancies that Chuck would view as “homosexual” is tortured and abused by Chuck. I have no doubt that Chuck is unable to separate his raging hatred from his teaching. How many children have you abused and ridiculed in your classroom, Chuck? A LOT, I’ll bet you.
It’s funny - there ARE moral absolutes, but you don’t seem to understand what they are. They have EVERYTHING to do with treating people well, and NOTHING to do with prehistoric taboos about sexual behavior or the clothes you wear or the foods you eat.
If there’s any justice, Chuck, then you WILL be held accountable, and you will suffer for your misguided hatred of so many of your fellow human beings. Love thy neighbor was not a suggestion, Chuck…This shall be the whole of the law, that was it, wasn’t it? Nothing about “with the following exceptions”. Seems y’all ChristerNazis want to forget that part and focus on all the people that your “faith” lets you hate with impugnity.
I hope you lose your job soon, Chuck, before you scar any more children with your vicious prejudices.
By FatMoose
February 24, 2006 03:18 PM | Link to this
If I see people bound for HELL, I can’t just sit by and watch them fall into the abyss, I have to do something.
And so you berate them and call them names!
Your full of BS CHUCK. You believe people that think humans and dinasaurs lived in the same time period - do we need more proof of your knowledge?
(pssst. The correct answer is “No we do not.”)
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this
Yes, so all of you folks who have been persuaded to come to Christ as a result of satan’s (i.e. chuck) posts, please come forward and be counted.
In the meantime, let’s play true or false!
JBM… spends so much of her energy denying the truth of scripture.
FALSE
When you challenge her on it, she never addresses the issue,
FALSE
…she goes off on a tangential issue,
POSSIBLY TRUE
…claims superiority,
FALSE
…and then starts foaming at the mouth.
TRUE… hehehe
I know that I should not respond to her the way that I do sometimes…that’s my own character flaw.
Uhhh, yeah, because everybody knows that satan doesn’t sin… he just has uhhhh “character flaws”
LOL!!!
By Gob
February 24, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
The truth of the scriptures?? That isnt much different than talking about the truth of Shakespear or Chaucer. Sure truth can be exposed through metaphor, but that same truth can just as easily be exposed by a metaphor in a romance novel. Beyond that, the “truth of the scriptures” is pretty flimsy.
By Mara
February 24, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this
chuck, maybe JBM spends so much time “denying the truth of the scripture” because there is very little evidence that the scripture is true. I mean, I could just as easily tout the veracity and “truth” of any well-researched historical novel and be on just as firm a ground as those who believe that God dictated the Bible to assorted “holy men”. You believe that it’s true, but that doesn’t make it true.
By Brian Curtis
February 24, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
Like I said, folks… responding is just feeding the troll. I have a strict jokes-only policy on Fridays. SUCH AS…
Yo mama so fat, it takes two Rings to bind her.
Yo mama so stupid, it takes her two hours to watch “60 Minutes.�
Yo mama so ugly, she got kicked out of the Stupid Olympics. The rule is “No professionals.�
Yo mama so poor, she can’t even pay attention.
Yo mama so fat, she eats Wheat Thicks.
Yo mama so stupid, she put lipstick on her head to make up her mind.
Yo mama so ugly, she looked out the window and got arrested for mooning.
Yo mama so poor, she goes to McDonald’s and puts a shake on layaway.
Yo mama so fat, we went to the movies and she sat next to everybody.
Yo mama so ugly she goes trick-or-treating by phone.
Yo mama so ugly, when she was born her mama said “What a treasure!� and the doctor said, “Yeah—let’s bury it.�
Yo mama so poor, you had to eat cereal with a fork to save milk.
Yo mama so fat, she had her portrait done by the Hubble.
Yo mama so stupid, she thinks a quarterback is a refund.
Yo mama so ugly, she got hired for Star Wars and didn’t even wear a costume.
Yo mama so poor, her face is on the front of a food stamp.
Yo mama so fat, when she goes to a restaurant she looks at the menu and says, “Okay.�
Yo mama so stupid, she sold the car for gas money.
Yo mama so ugly, they moved Halloween to her birthday.
Yo mama so fat, she had to get baptized at Sea World.
Yo mama so stupid, she took the Pepsi Challenge… and chose Jif.
Yo mama so ugly she makes onions cry.
Yo mama so fat, she wakes up in sections.
Yo mama so stupid, she sits on the TV and watches the couch.
Yo mama so ugly, she goes to the beauty parlor and it takes six hours just to get an estimate.
Yo mama so fat, she jumped in the air and got stuck.
Yo mama so stupid, when you stand next to her you can hear the ocean.
Yo mama so ugly, when she took a bath the water jumped out.
Yo mama so ugly, even Rice Krispies won’t talk to her.
By Archie
February 24, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this
Thanks Chuck and you’re right we do disagree on some things and I am glad I come across as mature,especially since I am in my forties. I do take a stand on a lot of issues. You know I am for universal healthcare, and I am for homosexual marriage and I have not wavered from that. I am against the Iraq war and all of my posts were clear on that and I am pro-abortion. I don’t discuss abortion much but I have said in the past that viewing the ultrasound had a profound effect on me. As a christian I do believe I have to follow some rules or at least acknowledge when I am wrong. I know I need to improve on a lot of things and God revealed to me that’s why I can’t judge anyone. I can give my opinion as what I think,I think, is wrong but a grown person will do whatever they want. I don’t think anyone cares too much about an internet blogger. I like JBM and I am just curious about some of her views as well as others on this blog. I agree with the homosexuals on this blog that quoting scripture directed at them is a waste ot time especially since the same people post every week.
By Renee
February 24, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this
Points could be made and would come across better if we ALL followed basic rules.
Respecting everyone for their beliefs, no matter how moronic we believe them to be
Not trying to change someone to fit your specific beliefs
Understanding that nobody’s opinion is either right or wrong, it is their personal belief (based upon facts, or sometimes not)
By Gob
February 24, 2006 03:41 PM | Link to this
Mara, it wouldnt even have to be a well-documented historical novel. There is very little documentation of the scripture outside of…well the scripture (or other writings that use the scripture as their base..but we all see the circular reasoning there…)
By chuck
February 24, 2006 03:45 PM | Link to this
Gob, and Mara, The flip side of what you say then would ALSO be true according to your reasoning:
Your UNBELIEF doesn’t make it false.
If you have read my posts over the past 2 years you would notice that I have attempted to show from both a scriptural perspective AND from nature itself that scripture is true. I have snippets of time to post. usually in the early morning and around lunchtime and then at the end of the day. I’ll steal a minute here and there, but I can’t write books and post them. This is not a great format for meaningful discussions. In any event, I doubt seriously that you have any real desire to KNOW the truth of scripture, based on your posts. If you want me to show you the truth of it, I’ll be glad to answer any questions you have…but I won’t hold my breath.
By Mara
February 24, 2006 03:46 PM | Link to this
Okie-dokie. One last joke and then I’m outta here for the week-end Wooooo-Hoooooo!!!!
A police officer pulls a guy over for speeding and has the following exchange:
Officer: May I see your driver’s license? Driver: I don’t have one. I had it suspended when I got my 5th DUI.
Officer: May I see the owner’s card for this vehicle? Driver: It’s not my car. I stole it. Officer: The car is stolen? Driver: That’s right. But come to think of it, I think I saw the owner’s card in the glove box when I was putting my gun in there.
Officer: There’s a gun in the glove box? Driver: Yes sir. That’s where I put it after I shot the woman who owns this car and stuffed her in the trunk. Officer: There’s a BODY in the TRUNK?!?!? Driver: Yes, sir.
Hearing this, the officer immediately called his captain. The car was quickly surrounded by police, and the captain approached the driver to handle the tense situation:
Captain: Sir, can I see your license? Driver: Sure. Here it is. It was valid. Captain: Who’s car is this? Driver: It’s mine, officer. Here’s the registration.
Captain: Could you slowly open your glove box so I can see if there’s a gun in it? Driver: Yes, sir, but there’s no gun in it. Sure enough, there was nothing in the glove box.
Captain: Would you mind opening your trunk? I was told you said there’s a body in it. Driver: No problem. Trunk is opened; no body.
Captain: I don’t understand it. The officer who stopped you said you told him you didn’t have a license, stole the car, had a gun in the glove-box, and that there was a body in the trunk?
Driver: Yeah, and I’ll bet the big liar told you I was speeding too!
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 03:48 PM | Link to this
Well said, Archie and Renee.
By Mara
February 24, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this
Gob - LOL! Tooo true. Tolkiens “Silmarillion” is as likely to be true as the Bible. And the writing is way better. :^P
Okey, this is my very last post of the day. Clocking out, going home. Air-kisses to all y’all and have a good week-end.
By Gob
February 24, 2006 03:59 PM | Link to this
Of course the biblical scriptures could be true…stories of Santa Claus and the easter bunny could be true too though. Your unbelief doesnt make it false.
Also, using a “scriptural prospective” to prove that the scriptures are true is a bit flimsy dont you think? I could write that Chuck likes small boys and then claim that from a writen prospective it is true.
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 04:01 PM | Link to this
That was good, Mara!
By The72John
February 24, 2006 04:04 PM | Link to this
In any event, I doubt seriously that you have any real desire to KNOW the truth of scripture, based on your posts. If you want me to show you the truth of it, I’ll be glad to answer any questions you have…but I won’t hold my breath
In other words, you refuse to aknowledge that Chuck is, in fact, as absolutely right as he claims to be. You aren’t worth Chuck’s time because you won’t bow to his claims of absolute authority and rightness.
Any rational human being who reads the so-called “proof from nature” finds himself rolling on the floor laughing at the credulity and stupidity of anyone who believes the pseudo-scientific tripe that Chuck/Schmuck claims as “evidence” for his mythological creation story.
By Renee
February 24, 2006 04:06 PM | Link to this
Mara, great joke!!!!
Chuck, I’m not sure if that was you earlier. I’m inclined to believe that it wasn’t only for the fact that you do usually own up to what you say.
You really should lighten up. Every debate does not have to revolve around religion. People who do not believe as you are not bad people. Be tolerant of others. And practice what you preach. Christianity teaches that no sin is greater than another, therefore, your meanspirited comments, low patience or whatever is on the same level as homosexuality (based upon Christian beliefs). Homosexuals and abortion having females are not the root of all evil in the world. And if homosexuality and abortions was removed from the world, I can guarantee other sins will surface (hint, there already are other “sins” if you will, that your focus could be directed on, and possibly achieving a goal.)
By Gob
February 24, 2006 04:06 PM | Link to this
Ok…a joke:
Two male Baptist missionaries are walking through a jungle in Africa, looking for a tribe to convert. They are caught by a primitive tribe of cannibals and are given two options.
Option one is death.
Option two is to endure the Chucamunga.
The first missionary says that he is afraid to die, so he chooses the Chucamunga, not knowing what it is. The leader of the tribe then has all of the tribesmen take turns raping the man. His companion is stunned.
When they are done with the first man, the leader asks the second what his choice is. He doesn’t want any part of what his friend went through, and decides that he would rather be killed.
“I choose death,� he tells the tribe leader.
The tribe leader then says, “Very well. You shall have death. Death…by Chucamunga!�
Yeah, I know….not too funny, but thought this group might appreciate it. Maybe.
By Bruce
February 24, 2006 04:06 PM | Link to this
An older gentlemen stopped by the local ladies fine clothing store and told the manager he was getting ready to celebrate his 50th wedding aniversary and he would like the sheerest sexiest nighty they had for his wife’s present - the store manager brought out 3 boxes - the 1st was nice nearly see through and she said it was $100 - the man said sheerer - the next was see through and she said it was $250 - the old man said sheerer - the next one you could not tell she was holding anything up and it was $500 - the old man said wrap it up - as he arrived home he told his wife happy anniversary and gave her the gift and stated why don’t you try it on honey - so excited her husband had remembered their anniversary she ran up stairs and put the box down and stripped naked and walked back to the top of the stairs and asked her husband “what do you think?” the old man rushed over to see and looked and got all upset and began cursing - the wife asked what is wrong honey - the old man replied - “you spend $500 on something looks like at least they would iron it!!!”
By Bruce
February 24, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this
The CIA had an opening for a new assassin. After all the background checks, interviews & preliminary testing were done the search came down to three finalists, two men & a woman. As a final test the first man was led to a big metal door & handed a gun. He was told “You must prove that you will follow instructions without question or hesitation. Your wife is tied to a chair on the other side of this door, take this gun & kill her.” “Are you crazy?” he replied, “I can’t do that!” “Sorry, we can’t use you”, they told him & sent him home. The next man was told the same thing. After a few minutes he came out crying & said “I’m sorry, I just couldn’t do it.” He too was sent home. The woman was told her husband was tied to a chair in the room & she must kill him. She took the gun, entered the room & immediately a shot rang out, then another, & another. Then after five minutes of cussing, beating, banging, & screaming all was silent. When the door finally opened, the woman came out & said, “You S.O.B.’s didn’t tell me the gun was loaded with blanks, I had to beat him to death with the chair!
By Just Being Me
February 24, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this
Renee, it’s impossible to reason with the devil.
That said, I’m inclined to finally take Brian Curtis’s advice. I’m just igging the trolls and demons and the like…
Sorry about contributing to the nonsense today, guys. Keep the jokes coming!
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 04:34 PM | Link to this
Good one GOB, I have heard a variation on that but there were three guys, but still missionaries, but the third guy got the You shall have death. Death…by Chucamunga!â€? because he started swearing and yelling at the chief as in (“Kill me, you lousy &#@_@%&)@ etc etc’ LOL) at a loss right now to remember exactly how it worked with the middle guy.
By FatMoose
February 24, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this
A little snippet from one of CHUCKS recommended books (this one is for children…):
Readers of all ages will take a thrilling ride in a time machine to the past when dinosaurs lived—a ride not through millions of years, but to a time not so long ago!
Filled with stunning artwork, this fun family book will transport you on a breathtaking journey through the “time-gate� of the Bible, the true history book of the universe!
This captivating adventure by popular writer Ken Ham projects you back to the Garden of Eden and to the real world inhabited by dinosaurs—and to the exciting days of Noah’s flood and the Tower of Babel. You’ll be there watching … traveling through the centuries … learning the true history of the earth, and along the way discovering the very meaning and purpose of life!
Join us on this journey to the very beginning of time—when dinosaurs roamed Eden!
No words for this…..just in awe of the truth inspiring premise;)
By Julia
February 24, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this
Fat Moose said, One must be absurdly ignorant to not be able to realize that there is no conclusive real-world evidence that a fetus has a soul - THAT IS BASED ON FAITH. And therefore has no place in law, since you cannot state that the fetus has a soul and IS being deprived of life (one must first exist before one can be deprived of something).I agree, that if there is real-world proof one day that shows a fetus has a soul; this issue WILL have to be revisited.”
First of all, non-religious people sometimes deny there is such a thing as a “soul”. You’re bringing in the need for religious proof in order for abortion laws to be changed? Hmmmm….I never said abortion was a religious issue. It is however a human rights issue.
The fetus/baby is a seperate life with a seperate beating heart and it’s own seperate blood type-not to mention it’s own seperate body and own unique set of fingerprints and DNA. This is a human rights issue-the ending of life. (Anything with a beating heart is alive!)
By Julia
February 24, 2006 04:43 PM | Link to this
72 john stated, “Many people do not believe that a newly-fertilized egg is anything other than a self-replicating, self-organizing clump of cells that might as easily be turned into, say, skin cells.”
You need to read up on biology John. By the time a woman finds out she’s pregnant the baby already has a beating heart. We’re not talking about a “clump of cells”. If you looked at the pictures you’d be surprised how fast a fetus develops.
By kimberly
February 24, 2006 04:52 PM | Link to this
Julia, yes there is a beating heart. No, it’s not separate until is IS separate. Whether you believe there’s a soul or not is secondary to the fact that IT’S NOT SEPARATE. Therefore, you cannot apply individual liberties to it without encroaching on the freedom of the WOMAN to control her own body. The fetus can do NOTHING without constant input from the woman. The baby’s rights BEGIN when they become SEPARATE from the woman’s, or at least when separation CAN occur. NOT before. I have given birth to a BABY. I know the difference. Get over yourself.
By Julia
February 24, 2006 04:54 PM | Link to this
Have a good weekend folks. Time to get out of here!!!
By Chilao
February 24, 2006 04:58 PM | Link to this
I always loved that Jewish explanation for how we have different languages, that Tower of Babel thing. mind boggling.
anybody heard about the Mayan calendar stops in a few years, 2079 or 2027 or something like that, which my Fundamentalist associates translate as the world cannot go beyond that. Now why they are having prophecy fullfilled by such a heathen/pagan group also kinda mind-boggling but…LOL
oh and apparently the world is not spinning correctly right now as well, it is a few degress kiltered from normal. started real recently.
By The72John
February 24, 2006 04:59 PM | Link to this
I know actual biology Julia, not just the over-exagerated propaganda that is bandied about the anti-choice web sites.
By FatMoose
February 24, 2006 05:01 PM | Link to this
Julia,
A fetus must FIRST be shown to have something to loose that is equal to a fully formed human and therefore has protected rights. This, in essence, is established by it having a soul (we can even eliminate this and instead use “is a complete person”). Until there is FACTUAL (vs FAITH BASED) reasoning that this fetus is more than a group of cells; it is a religious arguement that is based on FAITH.