AJC.com > Opinion > Woman to Woman > Archives > 2006 > April > 12 > Entry
Should no-fault divorce be curtailed?
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
No-fault divorce is grossly misnamed. It’s actually permission to unilaterally break a two-person contract, and suffer no legal consequences. It’s now easier for a straying spouse to get out of a lifetime marriage contract, than one for yearly lawn care. “I know we both signed the papers, honey, but I just don’t feel like being married anymore. And there’s nothing you can do about it.”
No-one is suggesting a return to a contentious process forcing divorce to be the “fault” of one party. However, many divorce-reform groups are suggesting that since the marriage contract is society’s foundation, we need to do much better at enforcing it and preventing easy abandonment, especially when children are involved. (For example, by requiring spouses with minor children to go through divorce education and parenting mediation before being let out of their marriage.) As I’ve noted before, studies show that as long as the marriage isn’t abusive, kids fare much better if parents stay together, even if there’s discord.
Divorce reform should never make it harder for an abused spouse to leave. But all reform proposals make abuse exceptions — and those marriages are a small percentage of the total anyway. In fact, not only do most divorces not involve abuse, most are unilateral decisions by a partner in a marriage that doesn’t even involve a high level of conflict. According to two different books (Divided Families and A Generation at Risk, respectively), four out of five divorces were unilateral — by only one partner alone— and 70% of divorces end “low-conflict” marriages.
No-fault proponents originally said it would protect marriages and families. They’ve been proven tragically wrong. The 2003 Statistical Abstract of the United States shows divorces skyrocketing 70% between 1965 (right before no-fault started), and 2000. As Focus on the Family senior analyst Glenn T. Stanton said in an interview, “Because of no-fault divorce, too many people have come home to find their marriage over and they never knew there was a serious issue. Divorce law should make the process more reflective and cooperative. And if you can force spouses to cooperate, they might be more inclined to save the marriage.”
Rebuttal
Impressive numbers. Too bad this isn’t a debate about divorce statistics.
I’m surprised there’s so much conservative favor for government intervention. But, it seems, some conservatives are suffering the same flu-like symptoms we saw in the recent Intelligent Design debate when they spun Creationism into a pseudo-science complete with its own set of pseudo-scientists. The logic goes something like this: if you can’t win the argument, tweak your premise or change your strategy. Where else could religious conservatives possibly turn? Religion does little to staunch the divorce blood bath. That’s because traditional religion is the disease, not the hope for a cure.
Religious conservatives gripe about the disappearance of recognizable gender roles and share a pig-headed resistance to gay marriage. This is because Christianity rests on the beatification of the heterosexual couple and the traditional family, that core unit of economic stability based on gender roles so important to our society back in the day when we were an agrarian culture.
But we’re not on the farm anymore. And our views about family are breaking apart as fast as our conventional religious beliefs.
Rising divorce rates are the result of a more permissive culture and legislative restrictions will do little to deter this trend over time. This issue is much deeper than transitory divorce statistics. It’s about what we really hold sacred. It isn’t marriage we doubt, it’s our traditional religious beliefs. And this, my friends, is something you cannot legislate. It’s called faith.
The real question here is whether or not laws can short-circuit social change. Rising divorce rates are symptomatic of changing social roles, broader expectations and the inevitable result of disappointment experienced by both sexes. They’re clear evidence American marriages are falling apart — not because marriage is a bad idea — but because its traditions are no longer deeply rooted. What defines a woman, a man or a family is determined by our shifting values, not by gender roles set-in-stone “Before Christ.” How we define marriage is as fluid and liberating as our imagination, not our legislation. Laws can help us adapt to change, but trying to go backwards and curtail no-fault divorce is like trying to hold back the tide.
Services »
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By Vermin8
April 17, 2006 08:14 AM | Link to this
Of course no fault divorce should be curtailed. After all, a quick end to a bad marriage might not extend the pain and tension enough for the children to truly experience what Hades a bad marriage can do. We can’t have that can we? Trying to save a bad marriage is like beating one’s head against the wall - let’s take our children’s heads and beat them for them and show ‘em how much we love them. BTW, Shaunti, sarcasm aside, I was once a child in a non-abusive but unhappy marriage. It was…well, Hades. Divorce set us all free, especially me. And this was bad how…?
By GOB
April 17, 2006 08:28 AM | Link to this
What time is the over/under for the time of Justin’s first post today??
By Troooof
April 17, 2006 08:34 AM | Link to this
Prevent divorce! Don’t get married! DUH!
By Randy
April 17, 2006 08:36 AM | Link to this
Did anybody not go to church yesterday??? We went from 2 to 5 services(2,500 seats) and all but one service(7:30 am) was standing room only. Pride and being self-centered stand in the way of most happy marriages. Also, maybe the statement “the family that prays together, stays together”. Talk about it, work it out.
By Jack
April 17, 2006 08:43 AM | Link to this
Randy. Is it standing room only for services other than on Easter or Christmas?
By Randy
April 17, 2006 08:51 AM | Link to this
Yea this is a great church and packs them in every sunday. I’m just amazed at the super interest and massive numbers of people who are going to church every week. You read some of the posts from this site and wonder are there alot of people who feel the way some of these people talk and you go to church and see the massive amount of people and realize the people on this site are major in the minority.
By chuck
April 17, 2006 08:51 AM | Link to this
Randy, Honest question: Does that man that three-fifths of the members DON’T go to church on a typical Sunday?
By Renee
April 17, 2006 08:54 AM | Link to this
What a silly, silly topic.
Why do people always feel the need for the government to have direct involvement in our personal lives.
For example, by requiring spouses with minor children to go through divorce education and parenting mediation before being let out of their marriage.)
Is she for real? (I’m sure she is). As a matter of fact, Shaunti’s whole argument is so off base. Words Shaunti uses to get her point across: enforcing, protect, requiring, force to cooperate. All of these things regarding a situation, which two grown people should be able to make their own decision, whether right or wrong.
How can one person assertain, if a couple is at an acceptable level of conflict for them to divorce. Doesn’t the couple experiencing it know better than anyone. So if we curtail no fault divorces, we will have a higher percentage of happy children??
By Renee
April 17, 2006 08:55 AM | Link to this
Why does one go to 5 services in one day? Just curious?
By Chilao
April 17, 2006 08:59 AM | Link to this
Thank You DIANE, Thank You! We are no longer an agrarian society, requiring 40 kids produced per couple, since 30 will die by the time they reach 5, and the 10 left will be required to work the farm, to survive the winter. Our food comes from mult-nationals, and can even be shipped in from Outer Mongolia. Okay, trucked up from Mexico and/or flown up from Chile for fresh produce in the winter.
No-fault divorce is an issue? Another write your legislators en masse? Who knew…… LOL (Gotta be all_american and blame SOMEONE)?
I have to say if your spouse asks for a divorce, out of the blue and blindsides you with the request, may I suggest your relationship not as peachy as you thought? LOL
I have had two, both no-fault, amicable, and worked out the specifics of the divorce with ample notice. Whoopee.
Randy - of course many people were in church yesterday. I personally know many who attend church ONCE A YEAR, and guess what day that might be? HINT: It’s the closest Sunday to this Monday. As it was, I attended a funeral Saturday, got 20 minutes of the Blood/Love Southern Baptist thing, took care of me for a year or two. On super-hard pews even, my behind is till sore. LOL
By Randy
April 17, 2006 08:59 AM | Link to this
Chuck, No most members go to church every week, this is just a newer church(8 years old) and the members are so excited about the church that they invite friends and family. I would say 50% of the people who went to one of the 5 services were invited. Great pastor and one who stays true to the word of GOD.
By chuck
April 17, 2006 09:05 AM | Link to this
Children are the reasons why Shaunti is right. I agree with you to a degree Renee when there are no children involved. If adults want to screw up their own lives by getting a divorce that is one thing (My personal stance is that divorce should not be an option. Any couple that goes into marriage thinking that way will usually end up divorced), but when they screw up KIDS’ LIVES, that becomes a SOCIETAL ISSUE and of course government has a role. Who ends up having to take care of them when fathers or mothers abandon them and provide no support?
I can tell you from 16 years of classroom experience, there are very few kids who come through divorce unscathed. While most “cope”, they rarely do as well as their 2-parent peers. We have more discipline problems and they don’t generally do as well on standardized tests. It’s no fun for a kid to have to go through.
By chuck
April 17, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this
I just wondered. We had a fairly normal crowd(maybe 5% more than usual). The church is usually pretty full anyway. We did have more visitors than usual.
By Randy
April 17, 2006 09:10 AM | Link to this
Renee, Why does someone go to 5 services, I saw the attendance at the services because I went to the 1 service at 5 on saturday and helped work the others. These services were attended by different people for each service except people like me helping out. It’s true that more people go to services on Easter, but my personal belief is that “most people want to go to church and will do so if not alienated”. Some churches don’t know better but will bring attention to a guest and guests want to blend in and be one of the group. Keeps some from coming back, my church doesn’t do that and it is absolutely booming. We dress casual(clean and neat) but no shirt and tie, this is good also. Churches shouldn’t put a bunch of unnecessary requirements on people either, let them come in at their own pace and feel at ease.
By GOB
April 17, 2006 09:11 AM | Link to this
Randy - What is your take on the “persecution of christianity” that many claim is going on, now that you recognize that christians are a huge majority in this country? Do you believe that it actually is going on?
By The Researcher
April 17, 2006 09:14 AM | Link to this
Mornin, all:
Renee, he didn’t mean he went to five services. He’s saying that his church went from having 2 services to having 5 services… at least I think that’s what he means.
But I can think of quite a few reasons to go to 5 services in one day… been there, done that, DESIGNED the t-shirt! LOL!
I agree, this is a silly, silly topic!
By Vermin8
April 17, 2006 09:14 AM | Link to this
Chuck, it’s not divorce that scathes the children - it’s the marriage.
By Randy
April 17, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this
Chuck, there is a great book written by Rick Warren “The purpose driven Church”. I would highly recommend it for your pastor, if he wants to increase attendance.
By Monica
April 17, 2006 09:18 AM | Link to this
Didn’t we just talk about divorce a couple of weeks ago? I like some of the “proposals” mentioned then: a waiting period for marriage. If we take religion out of the picture completely, as Diane suggests we should, then why should those who don’t subscribe to any religion ever get married anyway? Oh yeah, social security, family coverage on insurance, etc. I wonder what’s cheaper: the fringe benefits of insurance, or paying alimony and attorney fees!
By The Researcher
April 17, 2006 09:18 AM | Link to this
I’m crossing my fingers and hoping that that’s not really “chuck” but another imposter…. that way, I won’t have to admit that I agree with him once again.
Renee, if you recall, I pretty much said the exact same thing to you. I know that when it comes down to it, you may agree, you just don’t feel that government should have any say so in the matter. I can sort of agree with you on that note. But, you just can’t deny that kids are too often the victims of their parents’ messy divorces, and those kids become messy adults!
I know we’ll now hear from all the adults whose parents divorced and they’ve never been happier in their lives… had such a wonderful childhood, are ridiculously successful, etc… I call that the exception to the rule.
By GOB
April 17, 2006 09:18 AM | Link to this
Chuck - To your argument about divorce, sure, in an ideal world, all parents would be happy and provide good homes and set good examples for their children.
Unfortunatly, that isnt the world we live in, and in reality, it never has been. Making it harder to get a divorce might help some kids (say 30% to be overly generous) by helping the parents to reconcile. Even then, however, 70% of the kids are forced to deal with parents fighting (or worse) for even longer than is needed. That isnt going to help them at all, and will more likely be worse for them than the actual divorce. It is essentially taking the lesser of 2 evils.
By Renee
April 17, 2006 09:22 AM | Link to this
Good post Chilao.
Divorce does not immediately produce “scathed” children. We have scathed children, whose parents are together and unscathed children who have been through a divorce. I mean, who actually thinks that the government forcing a family to stay together is going to make the children happier. What you will have is one or two resentful parents who will make each others life pure hell (a possible scenario).
My parents divorcing was the best thing that could have happened. I fully supported it, and actually wished for it to happen a long time before it did. My feeling are not a minority either. Coming up, I saw many, actually most, of my friends parents going through a divorce. They didn’t become these ill adjusted members of society. Sure, they probably went through emotions etc, but here’s a thought, that’s life. How can we spend all this time trying to maintain this false utopia for children, when they will hit the real world and have a rude awakening.
By Renee
April 17, 2006 09:29 AM | Link to this
Researcher - I’m not an exception to the rule, trust me. Personally, if a divorce was mentioned in my house, I would do everything I can do to try to make it work. I took vows, I have a family established, and I love my partner deeply. But, you are right, I take exception to the government making that decision.
Will some people get divorces without thinking of the repercussions. Certainly, these same people probably got married without thinking of the repercussions. If they have children, will they be damaged. There is a chance, but there is a chance with anything. I don’t buy the argument that divorce is filling the jails and psychiatric hospitals with the harmed off-spring.
By Jack
April 17, 2006 09:30 AM | Link to this
I agree with you Chuck. If you’re planning on getting married, divorce should not be a consideration. Nor should a pre-nup. In cases of spousal abuse, no waiting period, abuser should be flogged.
By GOB
April 17, 2006 09:35 AM | Link to this
The bottom line as far as divorce is concerned is that as long as women have options, divorce will continue to remain higher than in the past. Also, when I say options, I dont mean it in a looking for a new guy kind of way.
In the past, women didnt have the option of leaving because most were not allowed to get an education. If they left the marriage, they would not be able to provide a life for themselves (and that is all aside from the social stigma that used to be attached). Now that women have the option of getting an education, and in turn a job that allows them to support themselves, they wont be forced to stay in bad marriages. Is any of that really a bad thing?
By Randy
April 17, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this
Good question GOB, are Christians being persecuted?? Yes, they are, however it is by a small minority of people( probably less than 5%) who have a different belief system. These are arrogant people who haven’t experienced Jesus’ love and actually believe they are right. When in reality they haven’t thought it through. Some of these people have gained position as they know that they are in the minority and fear the the power of Christ will get so strong as to make them give up their sinful lifestyles and accept him as their lord and savior. They like their lifestyle now and don’t want to change although they would be happier if they were to become a Christian. We as Christians will always be persecuted on some level as some people want to be selfish and self-centered and not really be happy. They don’t know, that they don’t know.
By PHILOSOPHER
April 17, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this
By my calculations it’s time for Just Being Me to appear seeing as how she is the “Researcher”.
By Jack
April 17, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this
“Divorce does not immediately produce “scathed” children”
Can’t agree with that. Not an expert on it but find one child with divorced parents that came through totally unscathed. Just one.
By Archie
April 17, 2006 09:42 AM | Link to this
No-fault divorce should not be curtailed. I mean we don’t force people to get together in this country so why should we force them to stay together? I definitely believe that couples should work hard to stay together mainly,because of the work and time spent on relationships. I am thinking of myself personally and of course when abuse is involved the abused party needs to get away as soon as possible. Diane is right that you can’t legislate faith.
By chuck
April 17, 2006 09:44 AM | Link to this
Renee, I thought the liberals among us were trying to create UTOPIA. Perfect environment, government check for everyone, nobody goes hungry or homeless…
Share The Land The Guess Who Written by Burton Cummings
——— Lead Guitar ———
Have you been around Have you done your share o’ comin’ down On different things that people do Have you been aware You got brothers and sisters who care About what’s gonna happen to you in a year from now
Maybe I’ll be there to shake your hand Maybe I’ll be there to share the land That they’ll be givin’ away When we all live together I’m talkin’ ‘bout together now
Maybe I’ll be there to shake your hand Maybe I’ll be there to share the land That they’ll be givin’ away When we all live together I’m talkin’ ‘bout together now
——— Lead Guitar ———
Did you pay your dues Did you read the news This mornin’ when the paper landed in your yard Do you know their names Can you play their games Without losin’ track and comin’ down a bit too hard Oh!
Maybe I’ll be there to shake your hand Maybe I’ll be there to share the land That they’ll be givin’ away When we all live together I’m talkin’ ‘bout together now
Maybe I’ll be there to shake your hand Maybe I’ll be there to share the land That they’ll be givin’ away When we all live together I’m talkin’ ‘bout together now
——— Lead Guitar Solo ———
Mmm, maybe I’ll be there to shake your hand Maybe I’ll be there to share the land That they’ll be givin’ away When we all live together I’m talkin’ ‘bout together now
Maybe I’ll be there to shake your hand Maybe I’ll be there to share the land That they’ll be givin’ away When we all live together Together, together
(Shake your hand, share the land) You know I’ll be standin’ by to help you if you’re worried (Shake your hand, share the land) No more sadness, no more sorrow, and no more bad times (Shake your hand, share the land) Every day comin’ sunshine, every day everybody laughin’ (Shake your hand, share the land) Walkin’ together by the river, walkin’ together and laughin’ (Shake your hand, share the land) Everybody singin’ together, everybody singin’ and laughin’ (Shake your hand, share the land) Good times, good times, everybody walkin’ by the river now (Shake your hand, share the land) Walkin’, singin’, talkin’, smilin’, laughin’, diggin’ each other (Shake your hand, share the land) Everybody happy together, I’ll be there, don’t worry, if you’re needin’ me (Shake your hand, share the land) Call on me, call on me, call my name, I’ll be runnin’ to help you (Shake your hand, share the land) Everybody walkin’ by the river now, everybody, everybody laughin’ (Shake your hand, share the land) Everybody singin’ and talkin’, smilin’, laughin’, diggin’ each other (Shake your hand, share the land) {fade}
Lyrics > T > The Guess Who Lyrics > Shakin All Over Song Lyrics
WHY NOT THIS SAME PASSION FOR CHILDREN? Seems to me liberals are all about “MY RIGHTS” and what I want. Sounds kind of selfish to me. I guess if you see children as disposable BEFORE birth, then why take responsibility for their happiness AFTER birth?
By PHILOSOPHER
April 17, 2006 09:48 AM | Link to this
GOB: Were you speaking of persecution around the world or only in the USA? There are many different countries were being a Christian is a death sentence.
In the USA and with the ACLU in full force they are trying to slowly take away all public references to Christ. Look at the school systems and the changes to Christmas. Voluntary prayer groups in school must fight for their rights where on the flip side gay groups are not a problem.
Slowly but surely the ACLU and their ilk are trying to do away with all references to Christianity. (Islam however is not a problem and we must show how tolerant they are so as to not offend any of the Muslims. It’s ok to offend Christians however.)
By GOB
April 17, 2006 09:49 AM | Link to this
Good question GOB, are Christians being persecuted?? Yes, they are, however it is by a small minority of people( probably less than 5%) who have a different belief system.
But if those 5% are not in power, which they most certianly are not, how can the persecute the majority population.
These are arrogant people who haven’t experienced Jesus’ love and actually believe they are right. When in reality they haven’t thought it through.
Isnt this statement pretty arrogant too though? Replace “Jesus’ love” with “reason and logic” and you would call that an arrogant statement right?
By chuck
April 17, 2006 09:49 AM | Link to this
Maybe people ought to have to PURCHASE as part of their marriage license a $250,000 BOND to take care of the children in the event of divorce.
By Renee
April 17, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this
Jack I can attest to myself. The divorce was totally unscathing, my parents marriage on the other hand, left me rather scathed. But not so scathed I couldn’t get over it and move past it.
Researcher is not JBM.
By GOB
April 17, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this
Chuck - How is it that legally forcing two people to stay together (on paper only) who have already decided that they have no desire to continue to be together will benefit child? Yes, a few couples might reconcile, but the vast majority will not. How are those extra months going to do anything benificial for the child?
By Randy
April 17, 2006 09:54 AM | Link to this
My position on divorce is simple, my mother and father gave me a very happy childhood, they were great parents and my children deserve the same happy childhood. I know some people need to get divorced, but I agree with Chuck, if you have any doubts about marrying someone to the point that you ask for a prenup,saveyourself the headache and don’t get married to that person. If money and materials mean more to you than that person’s love, maybe you don’t love them enough to get married.
By Vermin8
April 17, 2006 09:55 AM | Link to this
“Can’t agree with that. Not an expert on it but find one child with divorced parents that came through totally unscathed. Just one.” How about me after my parent’s FIRST divorce? They remarried within a couple years - and divorced again - so it’s hard to tell what my long term effects would have been had they not reconciled - but I’m telling you, while there was some discombobulation due to change in the household, it was not very deep. I was 11…I remember feeling guilty because I wasn’t experiencing the suffering kids of divorce are supposed to suffer according to the “experts.” Come to think of it that was the worst thing about the divorce - the stigma of knowing I was a “damaged” child (even though I didn’t feel like it, didn’t act out, didn’t have my grades drop).
By Renee
April 17, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this
Additionally, my brother, totally unscathed. He was happy, well adjusted, graduating from an Ivy League university this year. Graduated from high school as the valedictorian. Still a virgin, lol. And he was a tad younger than I, when they got divorced. He maintained straight A’s throughout his entire school history (he’s a tad smarter than me lol), but he was a totally unscathed child.
By Vermin8
April 17, 2006 10:00 AM | Link to this
“Jack I can attest to myself. The divorce was totally unscathing, my parents marriage on the other hand, left me rather scathed. But not so scathed I couldn’t get over it and move past it.” Yes, please all of you “for the children” preachers - please ACKNOWLEDGE this! Bad marriage is harmful and any case where the divorce itself was scathing, I guarantee you the marriage was 10x as bad.
By Randy
April 17, 2006 10:00 AM | Link to this
Gob, The 5% are in power, they are just in power in a different way. They own newspapers(check and see how many homosexuals work at the AJC for instance)they run TV stations, they work at the ACLU or throw them money to fight every reference to Christ in the public. Good point by Philosopher, China is so afraid of the power of Jesus(giving people hope) that you can’t send any printed material to people in China. The government is afraid the people will see the truth and eventually take over the government. Many other are countries like this also.
By GOB
April 17, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this
Philosopher - I am only talking about the US. Do you have anything other than Bill O’Reilly to back up your claims about all things christian being forced into hiding?
By Renee
April 17, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this
I meant to say “he was more than a tad younger than I”.
By candide
April 17, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this
Divorce should be allowed only for people who reject publicly Christianity. Christians should be held to their crazy beliefs. They love to parade their piety and still do what they want. In the bible belt divorce is more common than elsewhere. I also think Christian adulterers, liars, thieves, etc. should be punished more severely than non-believers. I’d really like to stick it to the Christers.
By Renee
April 17, 2006 10:09 AM | Link to this
Randy - how many homosexuals are there working at the AJC and how did you gain your figures?
By Chilao
April 17, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this
Thanks, Renee. I also have known many people over the years, from divorced homes, seem very well-adjusted. I am not the product of divorce, so cannot comment directly.
speaking of the ACLU, a cartoon I scanned from Playboy a few years ago. (being an ACLU member, I can post this). LOL, but the anti-ACLU crowd should love it.
http://www.pixpond.com/1/ae9iv.jpg
By Randy
April 17, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this
GOB, I just read the “reason and logic” part. See thats the problem not believing in God,is not reasonable and logically. That’s what they tell themselves that they are being logical and reasonable, when the opposite is true. If someone tells me that they don’t believe in God, I say, OH you believe in majic. You believe that no matter how far back you go to the beginning of the universe(billions of years whatever) that the universe just came together of its own power(just majically appeared)without the help of a creator. Things don’t just appear out of thin air without help. Every one I have had this discussion with(other than some of the nuts on this site) have accepted what I said as logic and reason and changed their mind.
By PHILOSOPHER
April 17, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this
Ok, so it must be Renee as the “researcher”. Sorry.
GOB: Who the heck is Bill ORilley?
candida: This blog is for grown ups. So run along now and play with your tiddly winks.
Randy: Great posts!
By chuck
April 17, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this
It’s called a cooling off period Gob. It seems to me that most so-called adults are just bratty little children who have to have everything their own way. That gets in the way of COMMITMENT.
Why Marriages Fail
Not all marriages fail for the same reason. Nor is there usually one reason for the breakdown of a particular marriage. Nevertheless, we hear some reasons more often than others.
They are:
Poor communication Financial problems A lack of commitment to the marriage A dramatic change in priorities Infidelity
There are other causes we see a lot, but not quite as often as those listed above .They are:
Failed expectations or unmet needs Addictions and substance abuse Physical, sexual or emotional abuse Lack of conflict resolution skills http://www.aaml.org/Marriage_Last/MarriageLastText.htm
Look at the most common reasons for divorce Gob. Those are reasons used by selfish people.
What kind of mature ADULT would put a child through a divorce because of POOR COMMUNICATION?!?!? I can understand it if there is adultery or abuse. Certainly nobody could be expected to remain in a marriage where they are not SAFE. Those other reasons are absolutely ridiculous. An adult who can’t solve problems like those, just isn’t trying. Maybe they SHOULD.
By GOB
April 17, 2006 10:15 AM | Link to this
Randy - I think that the 5% in high media positions and with ACLU is more than cancelled out by the fact that the religious right has pretty much taken over the house, sentate, white house, and to a lesser degree the supreme court. Writing an editorial or running a tv station is NOT power when taken in context.
By kimberly
April 17, 2006 10:16 AM | Link to this
Randy, you are full of “it” once again. Take a look at Rupert Murdoch and Reverend Sun Myung Moon, neither of whom were born in America but both of whom control massive amounts of American media and both of whom contribute staggering amounts of cash to the Republican party and other right-wing organizations. Beyond that, conglomerates are buying out smaller media every year, effectively reducing the number of independent media to which we have access, and bringing more and more of it under corporate control — by corporations who benefit from current right-wing policies, and the tax cuts they enjoy as a result of the populace’s blind following of this right-wing theocratic braying. The myth of the “liberal media” is PR tripe instigated by well-paid spin artists to capture the attention of those who don’t readily pay attention. Clearly, you are among them.
By Renee
April 17, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this
Ummmm….no philosopher, I am posting under Renee, in case you didn’t notice.
Please don’t start with me.
By chuck
April 17, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this
Vermin8, I’ve read many of your posts…trust me, you are “scathed”. And Renee, I really don’t mean to offend you, but don’t you think your experience may have contributed to your lifestyle choice? Just asking?
By Justin
April 17, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this
GOB, of course I have to provide my input…
Has anyone read this article?
/www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/25/AR2006032500029.html
Laws must protect the rights of Military Dads www.glennsacks.com/federalactionneeded.htm
Many Divorced Dads Struggle to Remain in Their Children’s Lives www.glennsacks.com/manydivorcedfathers.htm
By GOB
April 17, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this
Randy - You are missing my point. I was using the “logic and reason” statement to illustrate how your statement about people being arrogant because they dont believe what you do.
Your other argument about creation does have a flaw. If everything had to begin somewhere (or be created), then didnt god have to begin somewhere? To say he didnt simply because he is god is a total cop-out.
By Billy
April 17, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this
Chuck, I’m calling you out on your BS.
“Seems to me liberals…see children as disposable BEFORE birth, then why take responsibility for their happiness AFTER birth?”
Oh, how incredibly off-base you are…
It’s the neo-cons who insist that all potential babies be born, but then care nothing about caring for them. Who cuts things like Head Start and other programs that help disadvantaged children? Conservatives. Who would rather spend $100 Billion on a missile defense system that will never work than $100 million on ensuring that poverty-level kids are able to get well-balanced meals at school? Conservatives. Who blindly supports an illegal war that has resulted in almost 2400 US soldiers’ deaths, in addition to the 18,000 wounded US servicemen and women, not to mention the 35,000 Iraqi civilians killed? Conservatives. Who is against stem-cell research that could help countless people on the grounds that the blastocysts destroyed in the process might one day be babies, even though they’re in the deep freeze because they aren’t wanted? Conservatives. Who wants to prevent readily available contraception for as many people as possible so that more babies are born, even if they are born to those who do not want them? Conservatives. Who doesn’t care what big corporations do to our environment, even if their pollution causes diseases to skyrocket? Conservatives.
You can make the argument that liberals do not care about babies before they are born. It’s not true, but, OK, whatever. But to say that liberals do not care about children after birth just prove that you don’t get too good a view of your world with your head firmly implanted in your arse.
Jack —You are right, children of divorce do not come out unscathed. But neither do children of happily married couples. Every kids feels unhappy at some point. I know you religious people must have read the book “Wild At Heart”. Its author (correctly, I believe) posits that all boys are in some way “wounded” by their fathers. I think it’s the same way for all kids. No parent is perfect, and every child in middle school feels like an outcast.
The point is that forcing a child to stay in an unhappy marriage is no better for the child than granting a quick divorce. And since it’s no better, the children do not serve as an excuse for the government to rule people’s private lives. Conservatives just want to impose their religion on everyone. As usual.
By Randy
April 17, 2006 10:21 AM | Link to this
GOB, It’s well documented that Christians are persecuted in some other countries, 167 thousand lost their lives in 2005 because they wouldn’t renounce their faith.
Renee, I don’t know an exact count of how many homosexuals work at the AJC. However, one of writers at the AJC gave a speech about 2 years ago and he said “When I walk thru the AJC building, I might as well have a sign on my back saying I’m straight, because i’m one of the few”.
By Jack
April 17, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this
Yeah. I’m sure he was totally unscathed at all.
By RF
April 17, 2006 10:23 AM | Link to this
We’ve ground this axe until it’s a nub. And yet, somehow we’ll find fodder for debate alllll week.
Divorce isn’t the reason children are screwed up, bad parenting is. When you devote yourself to your children, they stand as good a chance as any whether there is one parent or two, married or divorced. I’ve taught 17 years, and I’ve had good kids and bad from all sorts of environments. Why do we feel this compulsion to keep shoving the Ward and June family model on people? That isn’t what makes kids happy—that’s what TV presents us with as the ideal. Time to get over that and realize kids turn out good or bad as the result of careful, loving attention from a parent or parents who are happy with themselves and their lives, marital status notwithstanding. Also, kids have to choose at some point what to make of life. The good foundation we give them will guide their decisions, but ultimately they have to decide to either be what we’ve raised them to be or be something else. Married parents don’t always produce good kids. My sister is a prime example. Perfect childhood, but chose to follow her “friends” and ended up a drug addict. Three other kids turned out fine, but one made some bad choices in spite of the good, wholesome upbringing she had.
By Justin
April 17, 2006 10:25 AM | Link to this
Turning the Corner on Father Absence in Black America
www.americanvalues.org/html/r-turningthecorner.html
Black Men And Divorce: Implications For Culturally Competent Practice
Minority Health Today, July, 2000 by Erma Jean Lawson, Tanya L. Sharpe
Divorce takes a particularly heavy toll on black men, resulting in mental health problems that commonly present as physiological symptoms
www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mim0HKU/is51/ai66918338
The shocking state of Black marriage: experts say many will never get married
www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mim1077/is159/ai110361377
By Renee
April 17, 2006 10:26 AM | Link to this
Chuck - no offense taken. I didn’t make a choice, so no, divorce had no contribution. However, I don’t see how if I made a choice, it would be contributed to my parents divorcing.
And using that logic Chuck, everyone who lives the lifestyle that I am living, would be from divorced parents. Which is not true.
How do you get “scathed” from Vermin8’s posts.
By RF
April 17, 2006 10:27 AM | Link to this
Gob, The 5% are in power, they are just in power in a different way. They own newspapers(check and see how many homosexuals work at the AJC for instance)
Geez, it’s not even lunchtime on Monday, and already it’s the homos’ fault!! How did we get dragged into a debate about no-fault divorce?? Once again, the conservative view that homosexuality is THE sin!
By lozen
April 17, 2006 10:30 AM | Link to this
The more I read of Shauti’s thoughts (?) the more I see 1940 and 1950 and then 1900 and 1875 for women in this country. Let’s turn back the clock and get back to family values. Like back alley abortions and women bleeding to death or dying from infection. Of course if you have money you’ll be able to just fly off to whereever and have a doctor do it just like it was before. No way out of a bad marriage - once you’re in it honey, you are in it and you shouldn’t be allowed to get out unless you can prove to some govm’t official or judge that you really are abused (and it’ll just be your word against his!) No access to birth control for anybody. Just say no until you marry this person you will never be able to get away from for as long as you live! I suppose the next step in their conservative agenda will be to deny all women, married or single, any information about birth control. Back to the family values of poor women dying after having one child after another. Life was so much better under the Comstock Act which made it a crime for married women to have birth control information! Women forced to get married to have sex. Women forced to stay in marriages they don’t want to be in. Women forced to have kids whether they want to or not! Oh yeah, they gotta do something about higher education too. No more college for women! I bet if you stop over educating them girls they’ll settle down and stop wantin’ to be free!
By GOB
April 17, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this
GOB, It’s well documented that Christians are persecuted in some other countries, 167 thousand lost their lives in 2005 because they wouldn’t renounce their faith.
The reason I asked about the US only is because this is pretty common knowledge. No need to debate it.
By GOB
April 17, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this
Who had 10:20??
By RF
April 17, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this
Seems to me liberals…see children as disposable BEFORE birth, then why take responsibility for their happiness AFTER birth?
I must be more conservative than I thought. I happen to be completely, totally devoted to my children and would gladly lay down my life for them. They are the center of my life and come before any of my personal needs or wishes. And all this time I thought I was one of those pesky liberals!!
By Randy
April 17, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this
GOB, I think you don’t understand the power of the press. A few years back the government want to break up Genreal Motors, GM didn’t want to be broken up, they did one simple thing, they stopped advertising for a small period of time. Thank god for most of the politians being conservative, but they are put into office by the people and the people must see thru the agenda of the liberal media.
Kimberly, I sure you have some points in your post however, what about George Soros, who throws billions to the ACLU? As far a the media being liberal, of this I’m sure, why? Because I’m a conservative and I don’t agree with hardly anything they say. FOX news is an exception.
By Chilao
April 17, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this
Once again, the conservative view that homosexuality is THE sin!
right now, until there aren’t any more(that Christian counseling thing awhile back). than there will have to be found a NEW THE SIN. Gotta have something to rally the troops around.
Wait, Divorce is waiting-in-the-wings..to name one..LOL
By BDJ
April 17, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this
Just a quick comment on this issue. I have a son (well, I suppose technically a Stepson, but he’s my boy all the way as far as either of us are concerned) whose mother got a divorce when he was just a little guy. Our family has been together just a shade under 12 years now. When she got that divorce, she just knew it wasn’t a good marriage and my boy was only about 3 years old. I’m grateful that the there was a no-fault divorce so she could follow her instincts. We found out about 3 years ago that her ex-husband is a pedophile and is now in prison. She didn’t know he was abusing the boy, but he probably was (pedophiles are notoriously good at hiding their brand of evil) she just knew something was off. My son is safe and happy now and so is she.
By Hadden Knough
April 17, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this
I read rarely this column anymore, but when I do I see that Diane’s thinking is still the best example around for why we doubt our traditional religious beliefs, for why our traditions are no longer deeply rooted, why there are shifting values, why our views about family are breaking apart as fast as our conventional religious beliefs, and the disappointment experienced by both sexes is the inevitable result . All those things she mentions above that most of us see as problems, Diana sees as progress.
“How we define marriage is as fluid and liberating as our imagination…”, she says. So, why not just carry this Sesame Street level philosophy to its logical conclusion and just “imagine” marriage away completely? Don’t stop there though. Let’s imagine no barriers to any behavior. Imagine we are all liberated to do, act, say what we please. Then imagine the result. Just don’t imagine for a second that this is not where thinking like Diane’s will ultimately lead.
By Justin
April 17, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this
Chuck, You would be amazed at how many women leave a marriage because the man doesn’t communicate the same as they do in a marriage. Most women tend to want to talk about everything extensively. Most men tend to stick to the facts and say what they need to say.
By Jack
April 17, 2006 10:39 AM | Link to this
“I know you religious people” Billy that sounds like something Candide would say. I believe in a higher power but I don’t consider myself “a religious” person.
By Renee
April 17, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this
Jack - having feelings about it and working through it would be a lot different than being “scathed”. Of course as a child you feel different things, and other things you might not understand but my point is, this does not mean you are damaged for life.
RF - do you think your parents being married contributed to your lifestyle? LOL
Justin - sweetie, ummmm….what is your stance on the subject. We know how you feel persecuted…
By Randy
April 17, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this
RF, I view homosexuals as liberals(what else could they be). I don’t think there is any argument that practicing the homosexuality lifestyle is a sin. That’s pretty black and white. Again, these people have said that they want to do what they want to do(live a hedonistic lifestyle), not what God as conveyed for us to do, to have a happy life.
By Hadden Knough
April 17, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this
I read rarely this column anymore, but when I do I see that Diane’s thinking is still the best example around for why we doubt our traditional religious beliefs, for why our traditions are no longer deeply rooted, why there are shifting values, why our views about family are breaking apart as fast as our conventional religious beliefs, and the disappointment experienced by both sexes is the inevitable result . All those things she mentions above that most of us see as problems, Diana sees as progress.
“How we define marriage is as fluid and liberating as our imagination…”, she says. So, why not just carry this Sesame Street level philosophy to its logical conclusion and just “imagine” marriage away completely? Don’t stop there though. Let’s imagine no barriers to any behavior. Imagine we are all liberated to do, act, say what we please. Then imagine the result. Just don’t imagine for a second that this is not where thinking like Diane’s will ultimately lead.
By Jack
April 17, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this
let’s just forget about marriage altogether. Everyone can sleep with anyone they want. We can raise a nation of bastards. We can also have the income tax raised to 80% so that the government can provided everything for us. We should also do away with Father’s day. Who needs it or Dad?
By GOB
April 17, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this
GOB, I think you don’t understand the power of the press. A few years back the government want to break up Genreal Motors, GM didn’t want to be broken up, they did one simple thing, they stopped advertising for a small period of time.
Randy, that doesnt show the power of the press as much as it shows the weakness of the government to stand up to giant corporations. I dont know much about the GM example. Was this before or after republicans took control of the government?
Also, if you were to compare the number of millionaires and billionaires throwing their money behind political organizations, the republicans win out hands down.
By The72John
April 17, 2006 10:49 AM | Link to this
It’s got to be some kind of record. It’s not even noon and already Randy and Chuck are in lunatic-fringe-rant mode. Apparently, all the world’s problems can be laid at the feet of homosexuals, liberals, the ACLU, and the worldwide Christian persecution movement.
Why is it that Conservatives claim to believe in small government except when it comes to controlling peoples lives? Then, the government should watchdog every little detail.
And let’s be serious - religious conservatives don’t care a whit about “children’s welfare”, or anyone else’s for that matter. They care about one thing - forcing everyone to conform to their idea of the perfect family. Mom. Dad. 2.5 children.
Renee, don’t even bother with Chuck. He will always believe you “chose” to be gay because if you didn’t then it’s harder for him to condemn your sin. I don’t know why you even bother being civil to the man - he views you as sub-human. There’s no need to pretend to be polite to someone who thinks you are intrinsically flawed and deserve to be treated as such.
Randy, I’m SURE you can cite your source for your claims about the global persecution of Christians? Of course you can, just like you can cite your source for claiming the AJC is run by a horde of homosexuals.
By Randy
April 17, 2006 10:49 AM | Link to this
Good point Hadden, What liberals see as progress(murdering babies, playing GOD) we conservatives see a fixing something that ain’t broke. It’s crazy, we have and have had such a great country and some of us still aren’t happy, we want our cake and eat it to. We not only accept these great gifts of God(if you don’t believe me go to most other countries and see their lifestyle)but some of us (liberals) want to be GOD. I’m just thankful Jesus isn’t like me, I would take this prosperity away from people who don’t appreciate it.
By GOB
April 17, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this
RF, I view homosexuals as liberals(what else could they be). I don’t think there is any argument that practicing the homosexuality lifestyle is a sin. That’s pretty black and white. Again, these people have said that they want to do what they want to do(live a hedonistic lifestyle), not what God as conveyed for us to do, to have a happy life.
That is remarkably narrow-minded. I know several gays that are a lot more conservative than I am. Also, it being a sin is only accurate if you happen to subscribe to your belief system, but at that point, so is eating shellfish.
By The72John
April 17, 2006 10:53 AM | Link to this
RF, I view homosexuals as liberals(what else could they be). I don’t think there is any argument that practicing the homosexuality lifestyle is a sin. That’s pretty black and white. Again, these people have said that they want to do what they want to do(live a hedonistic lifestyle), not what God as conveyed for us to do, to have a happy life
I didn’t think it was possible, but you have outdone yourself for stupidity, Randy.
By Jack
April 17, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this
Never said damaged for life Renee’. Just damaged. We get thrown curves all through life and if we get through it, it makes us stronger.
By thegoddess
April 17, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this
….. (taken from By Randy)
April 17, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this
Good question GOB, are Witches being persecuted?? Yes, they are, however it is by a huge majority of people (probably less than 75%) who have a different belief system. These are arrogant people who haven’t experienced the love of the Goddess and actually believe they are right. When in reality they haven’t thought it through. Some of these people have gained position as they know that they are in “the majority” and fear the the power of The Goddess will get so strong as to make them give up their joyless lifestyles and accept Her as their lady and goddess. They like their lifestyle now and don’t want to change although they would be happier if they were to become a Witch. We as Witches will always be persecuted on some level as some people want to believe their superstitions and not really be happy. They don’t know, that they don’t know. (Look what those christers did to us in Europe in the 12, 13, 14 and 1500’s. They tortured us and burned us, drowned us and raped us and killed our familiars! They wiped out whole villages of women because those women refused to give up their old ways, their family values, and bend their knee to their god. They refused to stop healing and making magic and meeting under the full moon to dance and sing and play! Of course, the church also wanted their land!)
By Vermin8
April 17, 2006 10:56 AM | Link to this
OK, Chuck…tell me…how am I scathed and how do you connect it with a divorce?
By Randy
April 17, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this
John72, I personally don’t have anything against homosexuals, I’m dissapointed in them for choosing that lifestyle and making our country weaker. But I realize the greatness of freedom and that I don’t want to make anybody do anything against their will. So I will try to be as gentle as I can but still show that I don’t approve of their lifestyle.
By The Researcher
April 17, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this
Okay, when I’m HERE, y’all get mad at me for talking too much, when I’m NOT here, y’all call me up!
Good morning FANS!!!!!!!
By kimberly
April 17, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this
Why do you people act as if TRUTH is somehow subjective? The truth, as in what ACTUALLY HAPPENED on any given day, is not something you can “agree with” or “disagree with” Randy… HELLO? The bias comes in (1) Choosing what to report or not report, and (2) Choosing whether to give one one side of the story or to include all available facts and perspectives.
Again, for those of you who are slow: The TRUTH is completely independent of your personal religious or political beliefs. Where is the TRUTH, and shouldn’t we (ALL of us) be demanding it? When you say you “agree with” this news but not that news, you are demontrating your complete ignorance to the fact that most of them are not even giving us news, but opinion, propaganda, gossip, or a carefully-orchestrated half hour of manipulative tidbits.
Um, Randy, Fox “news” may be giving you what you want, but if you think it’s TRUTH, then I have some nice beach front property in Oklahoma to sell you. You’ll like it there.
By Randy
April 17, 2006 10:59 AM | Link to this
Thank you “The goddess” I have always heard that imitation is the most sincere form of flattery. Let’s me know that what I’m saying it hitting the spot.
By lozen
April 17, 2006 10:59 AM | Link to this
To the self identified philosopher: Nobody else would identify you as a philosopher!
By Randy
April 17, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this
Not even noon and 72John has already lowered his argument to name calling. WEAK. WEAK. Maybe we could find him a 8 to 10 year old to argue with so he doesn’t feel so inferior.
By The72John
April 17, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this
Let’s me know that what I’m saying it hitting the spot
I think you’re missing the point, nimrod. This is supposed to make your tiny mind aware of the persecution that Christians have heaped upon others for centuries, and continue to heap upon others.
By Justin
April 17, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this
The government has interfered too much in our private lives and when it comes to marriage. Those of you who are gay, do you really want to get married? I know you want the rights of partners but look at the mess we have made of marriage and divorce. At least in the case of divorce in a gay marriage, there won’t be the issue of gender bias. Unless, the judges cater to the more effeminate partner.
By Randy
April 17, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this
Kimberly, Wow, so you were stupid enough to buy beach property in Oklahoma. Sharp.
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this
Good morning, everyone!
How silly it is to talk about me when I’m not even here (both today AND Friday). Just plain silly.
And whoever IS the researcher (and/or the philosopher) is intentionally trying to frame me because the style of writing sounds an awful lot like me. The only difference is that I’m NOT a coward, and I post under my own name and my own name only. It takes away from what little integrity the blog has when small-minded people (if that’s namecalling, so be it) use fake tags, and it’s borderline SCARY when those nutjobs pretend to be someone else!!!!!
Got a lot going on today, so you guys have a good day and live right.
P.S. At the time those posts were written, I was stuck on MARTA with about 5,000 other unhappy commuters.
By The72John
April 17, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this
Actually, Randy, I just find you pitiable and repugnant. There is no point in arguing with you because you simply refuse to acknowledge anything that doesn’t gel with your poorly reasoned ideas and flawed logic. You’re an idiot of the highest degree, and not only that you are a religious fanatic and a hateful bigot.
Why should I try to be reasonable with you?
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this
Real cute, Researcher, Philosopher, whoever…
By Renee
April 17, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this
How did this subject get turned around to homosexuality??
By Jack
April 17, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this
The sheeple cannot handle the truth. The media are taught to treat us like we are in 3rd grade. Right, left, they are all vulture scum.
By Randy
April 17, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this
You shouldn’t 72John, I know you can’t argue anyone into heaven, that’s something God shows them in his good time if they will listen. You have a lifestyle you have gotten use to and you may think you are happy with it and have probably convinced yourself of that. So good luck to you, I wish you the best.
By The72John
April 17, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this
How did this subject get turned around to homosexuality??
The religious nuts immediately started harping on it. Go figure.
By kimberly
April 17, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this
Randy, no I inherited it. Will sell cheap. You’ll love it there! Practically no civil rights at all in Oklahoma! Sean Hannity has a place just down the street. You two can go jogging together every morning while he tells you what you should be enraged about that day. You may never have to think again!
By Randy
April 17, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this
Amen Jack, about the media, they all have an agenda. Like were stupid.
By RF
April 17, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this
Randy- honestly, you’d be surprised how many homosexuals are actually moderates and conservatives. Politcal/social views have nothing to do with sexual orientation. Many people misunderstand and figure we’re all bleeding-heart liberals. I actually voted almost totally republican in the last few elections. Don’t automatically make the connection between sexuality and politics. There are many, many who defy the stereotypes. Many of us are law-abiding citizens who work hard, expect others to do so, hate the government give-away, love God and Country, and want our kids to be ‘raised right’. We don’t all run around overthrowing government at every turn and tearing at the fabric of American life. You’d seriously be surprised.
By Renee
April 17, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this
I can speak for my brother and myself, the damage was done during the marriage, the divorce was a relief. Had my parents been forced to be married, its very probable that my brother would have harbored resentment that would have interfered with his current educational accomplishments.
By Randy
April 17, 2006 11:19 AM | Link to this
My fault Renee, on the homosexuality, I was referenceing liberals in the media. Sorry.
By RF
April 17, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this
Renee- Randy broached the subject at 10:00 a.m. on the nose. And yes, I’m sure my parents’ choices, or maybe it was that I didn’t like my dad (love the man actually), or maybe I was subliminally influenced leading to my lifestyle choice. I soooo wish people could get past the idea that we’re all emotionally damaged, and that there must be some external cause that could be avoided or reversed. SHEESH!! How you doing by the way? Springtime starting up there at the pole yet??
By GOB
April 17, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this
Jack - That “vulture scum” is one of the most important things that have seperates this country from China or Cuba or any other repressive countries.
By The72John
April 17, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this
You shouldn’t 72John, I know you can’t argue anyone into heaven, that’s something God shows them in his good time if they will listen. You have a lifestyle you have gotten use to and you may think you are happy with it and have probably convinced yourself of that. So good luck to you, I wish you the best
I don’t have a “lifestyle”, you ignorant hick. I have a life. “Lifestyle” is an idiotic phrase that you conservative lunatics have created to help convince you that your discrimination is justified. It helps you compartmentalize into US -vs- THEM, and makes it easier to forget that you’re talking about human beings who do things pretty much the same way everyone else does.
By Jack
April 17, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this
Woof,woof!
By Justin
April 17, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this
Greetings Renee,
Yes, I definitely feel persecuted. Going into court, with the history and the evidence of being a good father, a good attorney, and the blessing of the guardian ad litem and child psychologist, I still was moved to the status of a visitor in my children’s life. I lost a lot of things I worked for “before” I met her. But, what hurts me the most is the lack of control over how my children are raised.
By Randy
April 17, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this
Kimberly, well that’s different then on the land, I take it. Sounds great.
RF, glad to hear that some homosexuals are moderate and conservative. Praise the lord.
By Renee
April 17, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this
Politcal/social views have nothing to do with sexual orientation.
Very true.
By RF
April 17, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this
(check and see how many homosexuals work at the AJC for instance)
That was where it started Renee.
Sorry if I misunderstood you Randy, but that seemed to be a pretty direct reference to us there, and not a positive sexuality/liberal politics connection.
By Randy
April 17, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this
I like to stay and talk to you fine people, but I better go do some work.
By Julia
April 17, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this
Enough already. Whether you agree with homosexuality or not how can you point to it as the only sin in the world? How many here have achieved “perfection”-where you have no struggle with ANY sin whatsoever? How many people in your church have attained this “perfection”?
Why are you harping on the homosexuals about sin when you yourself struggle with sin?
I guess you think only people who are “free from sin” may come to church or find Christ. If that’s the case then your church would be empty and you yourself would still be lost.
WHy can’t you reflect the love and forgiveness of Christ so that people would be drawn to Christianity instead of running from it because of fear of condemnation??? (Just a thought.)
(Sorry, my 2 cents for the morning.)
By Renee
April 17, 2006 11:27 AM | Link to this
All homosexuals are NOT liberals, click here
By Randy
April 17, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this
No making 72John happy today. I guess the logical question would be, 72John, who are you trying to convince you lifestyle is OK, me or you.
By Renee
April 17, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this
RF - I’m fine. Springtime is like almost here. We have warmer weather, but nothing, absolutely nothing is blooming. Oh, well I did see some crocuses coming up. But not a lot of greenery. Oh, and great response lol.
By chuck
April 17, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this
I agree JBM, if the researcher and the philosopher are regulars as they appear to be, they should post in their own names. NetB?
By Billy
April 17, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this
*By Randy
April 17, 2006 11:23 AM
…RF, glad to hear that some homosexuals are moderate and conservative. Praise the lord.*
Randy, the very fact that you didn’t know that many homosexuals are fairly conservative just adds another page to the “Evidence of Randy’s ignorance” file…
By The72John
April 17, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this
No making 72John happy today. I guess the logical question would be, 72John, who are you trying to convince you lifestyle is OK, me or you.
It’s like talking to a brick wall. A really, really, stupid, narrow-minded, ignorant brick wall.
By Jack
April 17, 2006 11:36 AM | Link to this
The difference is that in other countries the government controls what the media throws at us.
Tell me Mr.Smith, what was going through your mind when you found out your brothers were in those towers as they were falling?
Vulture Scum.
By chuck
April 17, 2006 11:36 AM | Link to this
Julia, are you the blog “Lady in waiting” with Queen JBM absent today? Haven’t you learned yet that we will talk about whatever we want to? In whatever manner we choose? No offense, but maybe you should mind your own business enabler.
By Lyrazel
April 17, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this
Yawn, solution to no-fault divorce—-dont get married in the first place. Most who claim no fault do not have children so heated arguments about custody are rather a fraud in this case. Most folk who file no fault do not have large assets so no heated arguments about she-got-mine up the (blank) because there is usually nothing but debt. Most people with no-fault are just leaving a bad situation and trying to do so before someone like Shaunti decides to preach how much they should stay with their soon-to-be-ex. Lawyers are cheaper to do no-fault divorces—less than or average $500…or do your own for $110.
Shaunti wants what is good for us and always wants the government to get more involved with peoples private lives which is the antithesis of everything Americans are entrenched to desire: no government in our private lives. This: good-for-you-even-if-it-destroys-you attitude decries a spoiled woman without compassion for others in less fortunate circumstances. Why does she always want the government to solve marital troubles? Like taxpayer $$ is going to make the divorce rate go down if states make it difficult? Hell yes, fewer will get married.
By Jack
April 17, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this
Oh Lord it’s hard to be humble, when you’re perfect in every way.
Chuck. NetB is above that.
By GOB
April 17, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this
Jack - Which would you rather see on the news?
“Tell me Mr.Smith, what was going through your mind when you found out your brothers were in those towers as they were falling?”
OR
“And President Bush won re-election for his 8th term with 99% of the vote. This is the 5th consecutive time he has gotten 99%”
By chuck
April 17, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this
It has to be more difficult for a homosexual to vote republican since most of us are against issues that resonate with gays. For instance, I find it repugnant that we spend more of our limited research funds on AIDS, a disease that is totally related to BEHAVIOR and nearly 100% preventable, than we do on childhood leukemia, heart disease and cancer combined. OR, most of us are against gay marriage and gay adoption.
I think therefore it is somewhat logical to assume that more gays are liberal than moderate or conservative. It may or may not be accurate (though I think it is) but it is logical.
By The72John
April 17, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this
Julia, are you the blog “Lady in waiting” with Queen JBM absent today? Haven’t you learned yet that we will talk about whatever we want to? In whatever manner we choose? No offense, but maybe you should mind your own business enabler.
Isn’t Chuck such a nice person.
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this
DEFINITELY not NetB. He’s way too mature for that foolishness.
And, don’t be smug with the “Queen” JBM comments. I can call names too.
By Julia
April 17, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this
chuck-I don’t believe I addressed you personally. So why are you being so rude to me?
I never said you couldn’t say what you like. Believe me, I know you’ll do that anyway.
Never been anyone’s “lady in waiting” but thanks. ;)
By Jack
April 17, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this
GOB. Apples and oranges.
Chuck. Julia is one nice lady that chooses to grace this blog. Wake up on the wrong side of the bed?
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this
AIDS is behavior related EXCEPT for that one single solitary case of the 11 year old at my church in NY who got it from her dentist.
By The72John
April 17, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this
I’m sure that the millions of children in Africa infected with AIDS appreciate your compassion for their situation, Chuck. It’s good to know that Christian charity and compassion survives in this mean-spirited world today.
Ignorant scum.
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 11:52 AM | Link to this
But, I know that’s the ONLY case in the world, so it really doesn’t matter.
By chuck
April 17, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this
I think you are probably correct JBM, but if it is a regular, there are a limited number of people here who could pull that off. He’s one of the few.
By chuck
April 17, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this
Yes Jack, I’m kind of bored today.
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this
Why are you harping on the homosexuals about sin when you yourself struggle with sin?
Julia, who on earth were you referring to with this comment? That stuff-starter over there does NOT struggle with sin. Didn’t you know, he’s perfect? He was sent here to show all gays how imperfect they are and how if they deny their feelings, they can be as perfect as he is!
By Julia
April 17, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this
Thank you Jack! Did you have a good weekend?
By lozen
April 17, 2006 12:01 PM | Link to this
Some very good responses this morning from Kimberly, Billy, 72john, RF, Renee. There is no hope for appealing to Randy’s intellect (?), ladies and gentlemen, bless his simplistic, superstitious little heart. I’m reading “The Misquoted Jesus” and it’s fascinating. All the changes that were made in what became the bible during the first, second, and third centuries when so many different christian groups, each with different beliefs about Jesus, tried to show that their understanding was right and all the other groups were wrong! We do not know what jesus said. We have never known what jesus really said because it has been changed so many times and then translated so many times. I didn’t realize until reading this book that some early christians believed the god of the old testament and the god of jesus were two different gods!
By Vermin8
April 17, 2006 12:01 PM | Link to this
Chuck hasn’t addressed by question, so I will address: I am a heck of a lot more scathed by the insistence of those who try to tell me what I’ve been through and what effect it had me IN CONTRADICTION TO STATED FACTS than I was my any divorce.
By Julia
April 17, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this
Thanks JBM! I forgot that Jesus apparently wasn’t the only one that was “perfect”. LOL
By Billy
April 17, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this
Chuck — While I somewhat agree with you on the funding for research issue, I think you’ll find that true conservatives would not be opposed to gays marrying or adopting. True conservatives would not advocate making laws to prevent gays from attaining equality.
And, yes, it is logical to assume that more gays are liberal than are conservative. But that is due not to the nature of homosexuality, but to the nature of today’s breed of conservative that thinks gays should be relegated to second-class citizen status if they are unwilling to change their sinful ways. I, too, have a hard time understanding how many gays like Andrew Sullivan can support Bush and his fellow religious wack-jobs whose political power comes from a base that is driven entirely by Jebus’ magic tricks, Old Testament vengeance, and homophobia. But they believe in fiscal restraint and small government, so they vote Republican. That’s likely to change soon (I hope) since the Republican party evidently thinks it can spend whatever it wants in its bid to hasten the Rapture.
By Jack
April 17, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
Chuck. The AIDS comment was asinine. If you really think that, you need help. There are many people who have contracted this deadly disease who are not homosexual. What a foolish statement to make. What? Can’t get a sufficient rise out of the folks on this blog today? Errrrrrrr.
By The72John
April 17, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this
For instance, I find it repugnant that we spend more of our limited research funds on AIDS, a disease that is totally related to BEHAVIOR and nearly 100% preventable
What is truly repugnant are people who believe that sexuality outside of the narrow constraints they deem acceptable should be punishable by death, the belief that someone people who ARE infected with AIDS because of unprotected sex DESERVE to be sick and DESERVE to die.
The same people who wanted to ignore AIDS 20 years ago because it was “killing all the right people” are the ones who want to cut back on research today for the same reasons. Never MIND the predictions made by every reputable medical association that AIDS represents a profound threat to the world population. These…people…and I hesitate to use that description on a group so clearly lacking in basic humanity…would rather sit back on their self-righteous backsides and watch millions of people die because they deserve it.
Oh yeah. These people are the epitome of Christian charity.
By Jack
April 17, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this
A very nice weekend Julia. A fun time was had by all. :) Hope you had a good Easter.
By lozen
April 17, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this
A response to : By Randy April 17, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this No making 72John happy today. I guess the logical question would be, 72John, who are you trying to convince you lifestyle is OK, me or you.
I would ask you the same question Randy… who are you trying to convince with your simple religious beliefs, me or you?
By thegoddess
April 17, 2006 12:16 PM | Link to this
Chuck, someday you just might have to have a heart transplant (you need one that’s for sure), and you’ll have many, many blood transfusions so, just in case things do go around, be careful what you say about cutting research money for AIDS/HIV.
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 12:22 PM | Link to this
I’m just so glad that most of you know better than to really believe chuck and people like him are really representatives of Christ.
I’m not meaning to attack you, chuck, but each and every opportunity you get, you make it your business to say the most hateful thing you can possibly think of. There is no way on earth that you could represent Christ or His message. Even if you take religion out of it, even if you don’t believe in Christ the Savior, but Christ as a human, there’s still no way that you even partially mirror the man that he was. You have ZERO compassion, patience - nada, love- zilch, temperance, humility, meekness, goodness, kindness: NONE.
Instead of saying, what can I do to edify these folks today? How can I make a deposit into their lives? You think about how you can sap them of any bit of positive energy they have.
I don’t know why I’m even bothering to say this, I already know your response (if you offer any at all).
To suggest that those who have AIDS have it because of their “behavior” is just low. Just plain LOW.
My good friend, a female, contracted AIDS from her husband, to whom she was faithful until the day he died. She is in a network of HUNDREDS of women across the country who contracted it from cheating husbands. Okay, maybe she got it because of “behavior” but it sure wasn’t HER behavior.
There are so many stories like hers… but you don’t quite hear them with your head in the sand. That beam in your eye has really blurred your vision. You should get it checked out.
By lozen
April 17, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this
What a big heart you have Chuck. I have a few words for you: Africa! surgery requiring blood transfusion! helpless little fetus that you love so much! rape! pedophile! Lying husbands. Lying wives. Lying lovers! 72John and JBM are absolutely right in their assessment of your character.
By Chilao
April 17, 2006 12:28 PM | Link to this
I am not sure Chuck would even know about the hetero-AIDS issues in Africa today. Would connote a certain knowledge about the world he unlikely to find in all the hate of the Old Testament.
By Billy
April 17, 2006 12:31 PM | Link to this
Chilao — it wouldn’t matter what he knows or doesn’t know. It would probably still be their faults they got AIDS in the first place.
By Justin
April 17, 2006 12:38 PM | Link to this
Jack, I agree with your comment about Chuck’s AIDS comment. This just shows his ignorance and his prejudice.
By RF
April 17, 2006 12:38 PM | Link to this
No offense, but maybe you should mind your own business enabler. So now we know what Judas must have said to Christ right before the betrayal…
chuck is one of many who honestly see AIDS and HIV as ‘the gay plague’. Many preachers have preached it (heard one a few years ago in person) and many homophobes use it as their scare tactic— “become gay and look what’ll happen!!”
Geez, the IQ level here today is dropping by the moment!
By Jack
April 17, 2006 12:39 PM | Link to this
“Chilao — it wouldn’t matter what he knows or doesn’t know. It would probably still be their faults they got AIDS in the first place.”
I thought Spring break was over. Shouldn’t Little Billy be in school?
By Billy
April 17, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this
Jack, do you disagree with me? Chuck and his ilk see AIDS as God’s punishment for people’s sins. How was my post immature or juvenile?
By Jack
April 17, 2006 12:46 PM | Link to this
Chuck has probably never seen someone he loves die the slow agonizing death that AIDS is. Have you Chuck?
By The72John
April 17, 2006 12:48 PM | Link to this
Any moment now, Chuck will be cutting-and-pasting something from a fundamentalist web site that proclaims absolutely and beyond a shadow of a doubt that AIDS is God’s punishment. It will be built on insinutation, strawmen, judgement and condemnation, and Chuck will tell all of us how he is the only real Christian around because the rest of us will tell him it’s hogwash, and inhuman hogwash at that.
Ah, religious fundamentalists. The real plague.
By Justin
April 17, 2006 12:49 PM | Link to this
I think the biggest factor affecting children after divorce is how the parents handle their post-divorce relationship. If both parents realize “Okay, we didn’t make it, let’s keep our children out of our disagreements, and put their needs first”, then children are much better off. However, the problem comes when parents try to pit the children against the other parent, see the children as a trophy to be won, and try to divide their loyalties.
Often that is why many good fathers figure that the best thing to do is just play a low-key role in order not to have any more emotional damage done to their children. It reminds me of the biblical story of Solomon and the two mothers. In order not to have their children emotionally scarred (death), they would rather let the mother take control, play the role the courts has assigned them, and pay their court-ordered child support whether fair or not.
By Mara
April 17, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this
I bet the Log Cabin Republicans would be shocked to find out they are really liberals and not the conservatives they thought they were! LOL!
Kimberly - Randy believes Fox News is “fair and balanced” because they told him so. For people like him, if they trust the messanger, they don’t question the message.
Randy @ 9:36 - “Some of these people have gained position as they know that they are in the minority and fear the the power of Christ will get so strong as to make them give up their sinful lifestyles and accept him as their lord and savior.”
Actually, it’s the power of some of his “followers” that we fear. They are the ones who insist that we live as they think we should.
Randy @ 10:57 - “But I realize the greatness of freedom and that I don’t want to make anybody do anything against their will.”
But you do Randy, you DO want to make people do stuff they don’t want to do. Aren’t you one of those who wants to make pregnant women carry to term, regardless of their needs? Aren’t you one of those who wants to force gays into 2nd class citizenship by removing orientation from anti-discrimination legislation?
By Jack
April 17, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this
Billy. You have to ask?
By The72John
April 17, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this
You almost had me there, Justin. You sounded rational and sensible about post-divorce handling of children - until the child support thing came up again.
How do you reconcile your claim that all you care about is your child with your desire not to pay child support?
By Justin
April 17, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this
A couple of things that will make divorce easier and decrease the number of divorces will be to pass laws so that one person from the marriage can’t take all the assets and in cases where there isn’t a history of abuse, shared parenting (joint legal and physical custody) is the norm. Shared parenting doesn’t necessarily mean a 50/50 split in time with the children, but puts both parents on the same level as far as making decisions for the children.
By Eirik
April 17, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this
I don’t especially like Chuck, and I don’t agree with him about AIDS research but the other gay men on this blog can’t completely dismiss his opinion as neanderthal…AIDS is preventable…As an HIV negative, gay man in his 40s who lived in the San Francisco area from 1980 to 1986 I think I am qualified to say that we (gay men) bear responsibility for many aspects of the AIDS epidemic. I’m not unsympathetic…I’ve been to many funerals, but the gay community still has a long way to go in this fight…and the cocktails don’t work forever.
By Jack
April 17, 2006 01:02 PM | Link to this
Billy. Maybe I mis-read your post. It sounded like you agree with the Chuckmaster. If you do not agree with him, please accept my apology.
By Renee
April 17, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this
~shaking my head~
I am completely outdone by your AIDS comment, Chuck (not that you care). You’ve come on here, and in a matter of hours have made baseless, low-down (to put it lightly) statements, attacked Julia, and the list goes on and on.
I can’t even understand the AIDS comment. But oh well…. Oh and then the homosexuals vote liberal thing. Soooo not true, I’m not Democratic, and don’t vote democratic, though I might vote for a democrat. Have you ever heard of the Log Cabin Republicans? Never mind, probably not…
By The72John
April 17, 2006 01:05 PM | Link to this
You may be qualified to say that about yourself, Eirik, but you certainly aren’t qualified to say it about anyone else. Just because you may have participated in bathhouse orgies and regular unprotected sex doesn’t mean the rest of us have.
And how do you suggest that gay men are responsible for the millions of infected men, women and children in Africa alone, for instance? I’m pretty sure that responsibility is borne by the heterosexual men who are promiscuous and then refuse to wear condoms when they sleep with their wives.
By Mara
April 17, 2006 01:07 PM | Link to this
Randy - I don’t think there is any argument that practicing the homosexuality lifestyle is a sin
Um, I think that is demonstrably wrong. Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, evidently doesn’t think it’s a sin. The Bishop of New Hampshire, Gene Robinson, doesn’t agree that it’s a sin. A majority of the Anglican House of Bishops, I’m guessing, doesn’t agree, either. So it would seem that there is some debate about the sinfulness of homosexuality.
By chuck
April 17, 2006 01:10 PM | Link to this
I didn’t say their behavior, I said behavior. I think it is tragic that someone would commit adultery and then pass their own sin to their wives/husbands and ultimately to the children. The problem with these cases is that while they are REAL and TRAGIC, so are other cases like children who get leukemia, people who get heart disease, juvenile diabetes, asthma etc. The only reason AIDS seems to trump all of these other diseases is because of the gay lobby. Do you really believe we should spend MORE on AIDS research than we do on Leukemia?
By Chilao
April 17, 2006 01:18 PM | Link to this
Jack - Billy was building on what I stated, that’s all. (he not agreeing with Chuck, just ‘explaining’ Chuck’s view)
By Jack
April 17, 2006 01:19 PM | Link to this
They may have a cure Chuck. They just haven’t bled enough money from those doing the treatment now.
By Renee
April 17, 2006 01:19 PM | Link to this
The only reason AIDS seems to trump all of these other diseases is because of the gay lobby.
WHAT???????? It has nothing to do with the alarming rate in which people are being infected and/or dying and that there is no cure….never mind.
By chuck
April 17, 2006 01:24 PM | Link to this
I don’t know where all the venom is coming from. This is what I said:
For instance, I find it repugnant that we spend more of our limited research funds on AIDS, a disease that is totally related to BEHAVIOR and nearly 100% preventable, than we do on childhood leukemia, heart disease and cancer combined. OR, most of us are against gay marriage and gay adoption.
Are ya’ll denying that AIDS is 100% preventable? Are ya’ll saying that the life of a child with AIDS is more valuable somehow than the life of a child with leukemia? It is impossible to have a logical, rational debate with people who don’t think logically. That statement was totally innocuous. Notice I did NOT SAY that there should be NO FUNDING for AIDS. Ya’ll just assumed that. Ya’ll are a pitiable lot for sure.
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 01:25 PM | Link to this
Eirik, I’m really surprised at you. I am so sick and tired of hearing the whole “minorities don’t matter” argument.
Okay, maybe there are few heterosexuals that contract the virus from their doctors. Only 7 in the country who contract it from their husbands. Only 4 who contract it from their mother’s womb. Few who contract it when the condom breaks. Eleven homosexuals who contract it from the partner who wasn’t as faithful as he said he was. Or sevem who despite being responsible and getting tested before beginning a sexual relationship, still contracted it when the disease was lying dormant in his/her partner. I know, I know. There are only 2 people in the whole world who contracted the virus from a rapist. I know. There’s only a half a person who contracted the virus when the hospital needle wasn’t disposed of properly. Only 3.5 in the whole world who got it when they were unknowingly drugged and violated.
Those minority cases really don’t matter. In the grand scheme of things, AIDS is a nasty man’s disease. A nasty gay man’s disease, and it only affects the dirty non-Christians who choose to be gay.
By Chilao
April 17, 2006 01:26 PM | Link to this
Now this is asinine.
perhaps because AIDS is a greater threat world-wide than some of the others mentioned. Asthma? Known any communities decimated by Asthma? geeeez.
Juvenile Diabites is a product of our unhealthy eating habits. Self-induced, stop the research. LOL
but we can be sure that if HIV had not manifested itself in the US FIRST with the gay community, there would be all kinds of support for medical research, initially. See the ‘And the Band Played On’.
anyone know anything about what the researchers consider Patient(HIV) Zero (in the US)? worth some research.
By Justin
April 17, 2006 01:28 PM | Link to this
The72John, I don’t mind paying to support my children. However, when the “entire financial support” falls on me and I don’t have a say so about how the money is spent bothers me. And, she constantly states she needs more. Now, mind you, this is someone who makes a six-figure salary, much more than me, but yet can’t make $1700 a month for two children. I have my children 40-45% of the time and I pick up all the costs at my house. And, I have them full-time during the summer months while I continue to pay her the court-ordered cs. All I ask is that the money follow the children for their needs. During the summer months, I really need that money for their camp and activities. So, do not peg me as a father that doesn’t want to pay child support. I just want the money to truly be used for their needs and not hers.
By Eirik
April 17, 2006 01:28 PM | Link to this
72John,
I’ve been openly gay for 25 years and I have not once been to a bathhouse or participated in an orgy…that was my point..which you apparently missed. I was at ground zero of the AIDS epidemic but never became infected because I was responsible, and I form monogamous relationships.
And the fact that Africa has it’s own AIDS crisis doesn’t mean American gay men aren’t still responsible for preventing our own infections.
So what’s your response when the heterosexuals say they don’t want their taxes going to pay for gay’s irresponsible behavior?
I agree with them, but we have to have a response don’t we?
How many people have you watched die? I’ve watched four.
By Julia/Enabler
April 17, 2006 01:30 PM | Link to this
Ya’ll are a pitiable lot for sure.
Maybe Judas said this to the other disciples.
By RF
April 17, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this
AIDS, a disease that is totally related to BEHAVIOR and nearly 100% preventable
Not looking for an argument, just a debate. Whose behavior, exactly, are you referring to so we don’t misunderstand you?
By Justin
April 17, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this
Many young girls are being infected with AIDS in many African countries. There is a belief by many men that if they are with a virgin, then it cures the disease. Thus, the disease is passed to the younger females. It is a tragedy and disgusts me when people state it is a plague on sinners.
By Renee
April 17, 2006 01:34 PM | Link to this
AIDS is NOT 100% preventable, although behavior modifications in people’s lifestyle (and lifestyle does not equal gay in this statement) could significantly bring down the amount of people being affected. But unprotected sex and sharing needles is not the only way you can get AIDS so, it is not totally preventable.
By The72John
April 17, 2006 01:34 PM | Link to this
Chuck wants to talk about rational debate? The man who immediately and universally blames gay people for just about everything?
I’m sure that in a PERFECT world AIDS is 100% preventable, but we don’t live in a perfect world. Chuck claims to, of course, but we know that to be false.
Chuck continues to believe that the victims of AIDS somehow deserve their disease. It doesn’t matter if an illness is preventable. It certainly doesn’t matter to the children who are born infected or the wives and husbands of unfaithful partners.
There are 40 million people worldwide infected with an incurable and almost completely fatal disease. That number is increasing. I think we probably need to do something about that. I think that PROBABLY justifies a substantial amount of research.
Frankly, I don’t think we should be judging what disease gets more research funding based on the moral quantifications of religious fundamentalists.
By Eirik
April 17, 2006 01:35 PM | Link to this
Just Being Me…
I’m sorry but you lost me there..
By chuck
April 17, 2006 01:35 PM | Link to this
In all the years since 1981 Renee, there have been less than 900,000 cases of AIDS diagnosed in the United States. Number of people living with HIV/AIDS Approx. 900,000 Number of people who may not know they are HIV pos. Approx. 300,000 Number of new HIV infections per year Approx. 40,000 Percent of new HIV infections who are male 70% Percent of new HIV infections who are female 30% Cumulative AIDS cases (as of June 2000) 753,907 Percent of AIDS cases (as of June 2000) who are male 76% Percent of AIDS cases (as of June 2000) who are female 24% Number of new AIDS cases (7/99-6/00) 43,517 Cumulative number who have died from AIDS 438,795 Percent of AIDS deaths who are male 85% Percent of AIDS deaths who are female 15%
Compare this to the number of CANCER cases for ONE year, 2002.
All types of cancers except basal and squamous cell skin cancers and in situ carcinomas except urinary bladder cancer: 1,284,900 new cases, and an estimated 555,500 deaths in the year 2002.
Compare this to Diabetes:
Total prevalence of diabetes in the United States, all ages, 2002 Total: 18.2 million people — 6.3% of the population — have diabetes.
Diagnosed: 13.0 million people
Undiagnosed: 5.2 million people
Compare it to the numbers of people with heart disease:
Number of noninstitutionalized adults with diagnosed heart disease: 23.5 million (2003)
Percent of noninstitutionalized adults with diagnosed heart disease: 11 (2003)
There is NO COMPARISON. This is a non-argument if you think logically.
By Eirik
April 17, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this
I fat fingered my last comment…
it should have read:
“I don’t agree with them, but we have to have a response don’t we?”
By RF
April 17, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this
Are ya’ll denying that AIDS is 100% preventable?
I’ll tell you I’m denying it. What disease do we have out there that is completely preventable?
By RF
April 17, 2006 01:42 PM | Link to this
Eirik- look up some numbers, dude. More hetero people are getting it these days than us because they think they can’t get it because it’s a “gay disease”. Most, and I say most gay men have learned to be responsible. They’ve learned from the heartache you’ve lived through by watching friends die. What about the meteoric rise in teen pregnancy? Trust me, that’s becoming much more of an epidemic than AIDS today.
By Archie
April 17, 2006 01:43 PM | Link to this
I am afraid I have to echo the comments of several bloggers about the comments of Chuck. Chuck’s comments are callous and un-christian like and they remind me of a friend’s comments who happens to be conservative without rhyme or reason. I mean I have told this friend of mine he is a homophobe. This friend looked,looked for a church that shared his anti-homosexual philosophy. The thing is I have never heard anyone else say that’s what they were looking for in a church. I have told this friend that there is something wrong with him mentally, but to no avail and that’s how I feel about Chuck and that’s why I don’t argue with Chuck as it will have no effect. If a person is irrational politically one way or the other, logical political statements will have zero effect on them because such a person will regurgitate what they hear coming from a talk show,etc.
By Renee
April 17, 2006 01:44 PM | Link to this
LOL Julia, I looove the name change. Way to accept responsibility.
Ummm RF…you know the answer to that. LOL
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 01:46 PM | Link to this
Are ya’ll saying that the life of a child with AIDS is more valuable somehow than the life of a child with leukemia?
No, I’m not. Are you saying that the life of a child with Leukemia is more valuable somehow than the life of a child with AIDS?
Leukemia happens to be close to my heart because it killed my father. AIDS is also close to my heart because the majority of my friends are HIV positive or have full-blown AIDS.
I see no reason to cut back on funding for AIDS research as long as the disease infects (and affects) so many people in this country and beyond. This is a widespread disease, regardless of the origin, or the cause, it’s here and it’s not going anywhere until we continue to educate the masses and work toward finding a cure.
You’ve probably never seen anyone die from AIDS (granted, that’s a pretty big assumption on my part). I’m pretty sure that if you have a fragment of a heart, all it’ll take is for you to meet one person who is sick with the disease before you realize how important this fight is; how important awareness, education and research are to the fight against AIDS.
It doesn’t matter where they got it or how they got it or whether they were “saved” or not, or had “acceptable” behavior or not… what matters is that these people, these humans, children of God, live in daily agony waiting, praying, hoping, wishing, for a cure. They go blind. They are covered from head to toe with boils. They suffer night sweats. They lose their hair, they go deaf. They get infections. They suffer from sore muscles, constant aches, fevers, low energy, blurred vision, ear ringing (and let’s not forget the stares, whispers, and pointing)… They die slow, agonizing, painful, peaceless and UNdignified deaths.
And you would suggest that we cut back on funding for research?
By chuck
April 17, 2006 01:47 PM | Link to this
RF, I am talking about the behavior of the people who HAVE AIDS and who SPREAD it. Drug addicts who share needles then have sex with spouses or strangers for money or whoever. Gays who have promiscuous sex with multiple partners who spread AIDS exponentially. Heterosexuals who have sex outside of marriage and then spread it to their spouses and subsequent children. It is an INTERNATIONAL TRAGEDY.
I am not unsympathetic to those who have contracted the disease innocently or NOT so innocently. I just don’t think that it is fair to spend so disproportionally on AIDS when there are other more deadly diseases that are not caused primarily by behavior AND that affect far more Americans than does AIDS.
By The72John
April 17, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this
Cancer is not communicable. AIDS is. Do you WANT to see the number of AIDS cases rival other diseases? And are you truly so short-sighted that you don’t believe that the massive epidemic in sub-saharan Africa and the growing epidemics in Asia and Eastern Europe won’t have significant impact on the world as they spiral more and more out of control?
Skip that - we know the answer. Any excuse to continue your crusade against all things gay, or perceived as gay. Any excuse for you to pass judgement on the many, many people you deem unworthy.
By Eirik
April 17, 2006 01:55 PM | Link to this
RF,
I agree with much of what you said but I don’t know if you have visited Los Angeles lately…
There’s still an epidemic…yes, there is less acceleration but young guys are still getting infected.
By Eirik
April 17, 2006 01:55 PM | Link to this
RF,
I agree with much of what you said but I don’t know if you have visited Los Angeles lately…
There’s still an epidemic…yes, there is less acceleration but young guys are still getting infected.
By Julia
April 17, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this
Renee-Thanks! I can now see that chuck is making people see how wonderful being a Christian is. And I, on the other hand, am causing people to want to stay away from Christ because I accept them and try to reach out in love and understanding. (Maybe one of these days I’ll get my act together.)
By Chilao
April 17, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this
Don’t we know what causes diabetes, beside the hereditary factor? Unhealthy, sweet diet? Soda pops? BonBons?
Don’t we know what causes heart disease? Unhealthy diet, fats in foods? Cheeseburgers? Pork BBQ? Smoking(let’s not forget that one….LOL)
My nutritionist mother would argue that.
So we need a pill to negate all that or something?
Face it, the only reason so many people like Chuck are anti-AIDS research is because it was manifested in the U.S. FIRST with the gay crowd. Now if it first was among prostitutes, who had bare-back johns, who were carrying it home to their church-going wives, the same group would be all for research(as well as prostitue extermination..LOL)
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this
Hey chuck, can you please e-mail me at jbmnatl@yahoo.com? I would like you to read something but it’s Bible-based, so I don’t want to junk up the blog with it. Got an e-mail on Friday and immediately thought of you, just wasn’t here to share it.
By Chilao
April 17, 2006 02:03 PM | Link to this
I think the biggest HIV-increase groups are now urban black females, and rural southerners, both black and white.
By Chilao
April 17, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this
s/b YOUNG rural southerners, both black and white.
By RF
April 17, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this
Julia- you sinful thang, you. And all this time you were making me want to go to church. What an idea! Okay, now seriously, if it weren’t for people like you, I’d have given up on church a LONG time ago!!
Chuck- very good, well articulated answer. You had me worried for a moment there.
Eirik- as long as there are communicable diseases, there will, unfortunately, be those who ignore the warnings. I don’t think the percentages though are any higher among gay men. Because they are drawn to cities like LA, NY, and Frisco, you see more of it there. Across the nation though, I doubt the percentages are any higher than any other sexual group.
By Jack
April 17, 2006 02:14 PM | Link to this
“And I, on the other hand, am causing people to want to stay away from Christ because I accept them and try to reach out in love and understanding. (Maybe one of these days I’ll get my act together.)”
Your act is together. :)
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 02:14 PM | Link to this
Eirik, never mind, dear.
By Billy
April 17, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this
72John — personally, the fact that cancer is NOT communicable but still affects so many people scares the hell out of me.
I know I’m at a very low risk of getting AIDS. My wife and I are faithful to each other. Neither of us uses drugs. Even blood transfusions now are very safe. The risk of me getting AIDS is almost as non-existent as possible. I also don’t know anyone personally who is HIV-positive. Hell, I don’t think I know any openly gay people.
I don’t drink heavily. I don’t smoke. I try to use sunscreen as much as possible. I still could get cancer. I have no way of preventing it. I have known several people to be affected by cancer.
The fact that there are people like Dana Reeve who die from lung cancer when they were nonsmokers illustrates the danger cancer poses. Cancer can strike people who live perfectly healthy lifesyles — alcohol- and tobacco-free, monogamus, frequent exercise, healthy diet, sunscreen whenever they go outside…That’s why it’s scary. I’m not scared of AIDS because my chances of getting it are practically nil. I’m scared of cancer because all of a sudden my cells could just decude to start growing extra fast.
My point it that even given his huge failings as a human being, Chuck has a point about the diseases. AIDS is largely preventable. A hermit who lives alone, never uses drugs, and never has sex is not going to get AIDS. Cancer, though, he might get.
But why are we arguing about this? Why is the funding an “either-or” question? Why, if we increase cancer research funding, must we decrease funding for AIDS research? Why not take that money we’re spending on the research and development of new “bunker-busting” nuk-yu-lar weapons and put it into finding a cure for both epidemics? Why don’t we demand that the FDA approve the HPV vaccine, which would prevent millions of women from contracting genital warts, the leading cause of cervical cancer? Take those cases of cervical cancer out of the equation, and there’s a bit more money per cancer patient.
Let’s fund them both heavily. Take some money away from the Pentagon. Repeal the Bush tax cuts, the billions given away to Big Oil…Bring back the Estate Tax. We can cure this stuff if we put those resources into it.
Another way to cure it? Tell the pharmeceutical companies that if they aren’t cured in ten years that we’ll allow reimportation of drugs from Canada. Or better yet, that no patent on a drug will last for more than a year. Or that we’re legalizing pot so people won’t need to buy Zoloft…
By Billy
April 17, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this
72John — personally, the fact that cancer is NOT communicable but still affects so many people scares the hell out of me.
I know I’m at a very low risk of getting AIDS. My wife and I are faithful to each other. Neither of us uses drugs. Even blood transfusions now are very safe. The risk of me getting AIDS is almost as non-existent as possible. I also don’t know anyone personally who is HIV-positive. Hell, I don’t think I know any openly gay people.
I don’t drink heavily. I don’t smoke. I try to use sunscreen as much as possible. I still could get cancer. I have no way of preventing it. I have known several people to be affected by cancer.
The fact that there are people like Dana Reeve who die from lung cancer when they were nonsmokers illustrates the danger cancer poses. Cancer can strike people who live perfectly healthy lifesyles — alcohol- and tobacco-free, monogamus, frequent exercise, healthy diet, sunscreen whenever they go outside…That’s why it’s scary. I’m not scared of AIDS because my chances of getting it are practically nil. I’m scared of cancer because all of a sudden my cells could just decude to start growing extra fast.
My point it that even given his huge failings as a human being, Chuck has a point about the diseases. AIDS is largely preventable. A hermit who lives alone, never uses drugs, and never has sex is not going to get AIDS. Cancer, though, he might get.
But why are we arguing about this? Why is the funding an “either-or” question? Why, if we increase cancer research funding, must we decrease funding for AIDS research? Why not take that money we’re spending on the research and development of new “bunker-busting” nuk-yu-lar weapons and put it into finding a cure for both epidemics? Why don’t we demand that the FDA approve the HPV vaccine, which would prevent millions of women from contracting genital warts, the leading cause of cervical cancer? Take those cases of cervical cancer out of the equation, and there’s a bit more money per cancer patient.
Let’s fund them both heavily. Take some money away from the Pentagon. Repeal the Bush tax cuts, the billions given away to Big Oil…Bring back the Estate Tax. We can cure this stuff if we put those resources into it.
Another way to cure it? Tell the pharmeceutical companies that if they aren’t cured in ten years that we’ll allow reimportation of drugs from Canada. Or better yet, that no patent on a drug will last for more than a year. Or that we’re legalizing pot so people won’t need to buy Zoloft…
By Eirik
April 17, 2006 02:20 PM | Link to this
RF,
Point taken. But gay people are smarter…so we should know better :).
Seriously though, I know many young guys that see AIDS as a manageable disease…and why not? There are drugs available that can keep you pretty much in normal health indefinitely..if you can get them. I have a friend that has been positive since 1989 and has never shown any symptoms of AIDS. Fortunately he has good insurance and has access to the latest drugs.
By Justin
April 17, 2006 02:20 PM | Link to this
Should no-fault divorce be curtailed?
Divorce where a winner takes all should definitely be curtailed!
So you want to get married and live a happy good life
Posted By: cubalife
Date: 10 August 2002
If I could offer a young man one piece of sage advice, it would be this:
Don’t get married.
Don’t do it. Come the divorce, as come it probably will, the courts will systematically shear you of your children, your house, and huge amounts of your income for twenty years. Don’t do it. It isn’t worth it. Nothing is.
My saying this usually brings, from women, cries that I’m an extremist or woman-hater. No.
The problem is not women, but the courts. Men can behave every bit as reprehensibly as women, though they go about it differently. But the judicial system, which is politicized to the gills, utterly favors women over men in divorce cases, without remorse, decency, or concern for children.
Should you doubt this, read, before you pop the most foolish of questions, “From Courtship to Courthouse”, by the divorce lawyer Jed Abraham.
Writes Abraham, “If you’re like most men, you’re married, or you hope to marry some day. You think you deserve to live happily ever after, but if things don’t work out that way, you’ll get a civilized divorce and move on. You’ll stay pals with your ex, and you’ll see your kids as often as you want.
“You have no idea what you’re getting into.”
And you don’t. Not the faintest freaking clue.
A few facts from Abraham:
“The odds are 50% that your marriage will end in divorce. The odds are 70% that your divorce will be filed by your wife. The odds are 80% that your wife will get custody of your children-plus child support, alimony, and/or a hefty chunk of your property.”
That is how it is.
Yes, I know: You don’t think this applies to you. Cup Cake loves you. She would never behave in such a way. Think again. You have no conception of the hatred that divorce engenders. Men are callous; women are mean. When a family breaks up, when a life dreamed of disappears in flames and emotions go limbic, women are not the kinder sex, and certainly not the more rational. And Cup Cake will have the absolute upper hand, with the full power of the state to help her express her dissatisfaction with you.
Abraham: “If your wages are not withheld and you fail to pay your child support, the State will garnish your pay, slap liens on your property, intercept your tax refunds, report you to credit agencies, discontinue your driver’s license, suspend your professional and business permits, hold you in contempt of court, put your face on a wanted poster, throw you in jail, and deny you food stamps. But if your ex doesn’t spend that very same support on the children, the State will do … nothing.”
It gets worse. There is, for example, “imputed income.” This means that your child support will be based not on what your children need, not on what you earn, but on what the court decides you could earn.
Don’t do it.
If you love Cup Cake, live with her. Be kind to her. Be loyal to her. She may be as nice as you think she is: Many women are. Buy her roses. Just don’t marry her, or have children with her. If the laws were even-handed, marriage would be an admirable institution. The laws aren’t equal.
But it’s the kids she’ll use, should things get nasty, to tear your guts out. If you’re sure that Cup Cake won’t do this, you’re crazy. True, she may not. Not all women do, or not to the same degree. But you won’t know until it’s too late. And the courts will do anything she wants.
Abraham: “Your ex will warm to calling all the shots. She may cancel your visitation now and then. If she’s truly mean-spirited, she’ll go much further. Under the cover of her court-appointed role as sole custodian, she’ll systematically sever your relationship with the children. She’ll badmouth you to them. She’ll schedule their extracurricular activities during your visitation time. For good measure, she may accuse you of domestic violence and child abuse.”
Think “joint custody” is the answer? The courts won’t enforce it. What are you going to do - sue Mommy? The kids will hate you for it. Do you believe in pre-nups? The courts ignore them. Read Abraham. It’s all there.
Then, says Abraham, there’s the killer: “More efficiently, your ex may simply move with the children to a distant community, with the law’s acquiescence.”
Kids are the crunch, guys. They hurt. And she will know it, and use it. The courts will help her. At bottom, the position of the courts is that the children are her property, like furniture. Judges don’t care about you at all.
Ever drive away from what used to be your home, with your daughter of four streaking across the parking lot, yelling, “Daddy! Daddy! Please come back!”-and you can’t?
Ever have your little girl of four say, “Daddy, can I get my birthday present early?”
“Why, Pumpkin?”
“Well … after the divorce we might move, and I won’t see you again.”
That’s what you are in for, guys. Don’t do it. You’ll be suicidally depressed, miss your kids to the point of desperation, be almost frantic - and the courts will make sure you can do nothing about it. The ex will probably enjoy it.
That’s the reality. Don’t believe it? Talk to men who have been there.
Why do women do these things? Not because they’re evil. Cup Cake is probably a perfectly decent woman in her dealing with the rest of the earth. She’ll do it because she hates you, which is the normal outcome of a divorce. She’ll do it because she can. She’s furious because the marriage “didn’t work”, which will be “entirely your fault”.
And the law gives her every incentive: She will get the house, the kids, the child support-and she knows she will. If women knew they had an even chance of not getting custody, of having to pay child support, the divorce rate would drop like a prom dress and joint custody would suddenly mean joint custody. Women love their children as much as men do.
But that’s not how it is. The courts encourage divorce, and they rape men. Get used to it.
“The odds are it doesn’t pay for you to marry and have kids.”
That’s a fact, guys. Think about it.
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 02:22 PM | Link to this
Eirik, never mind, dear.
By chuck
April 17, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this
Archie, could you tell me HOW the comments that I have made on this topic are callous? It amazes me that when you look at 1.2 million NEW cases of cancer EVERY YEAR compared to 900,000 cases of AIDS in 25 years that you can justify spending MORE on AIDS research than on CANCER research. I have not said that we should cut out all spending on AIDS but if you don’t see the REASON for this additional spending as being POLITICALLY motivated, then your head is in the sand.
By RF
April 17, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this
Billy- with all the fund raisers I see and participate in for various kinds of cancer research, you’d think they’d find a cure. I highly doubt more money is raised and donated to AIDS research. Could be, but I doubt it. There’s a cancer fundraiser going on allllll the time. Where does all that money go, I wonder??
By Billy
April 17, 2006 02:25 PM | Link to this
Sorry about the double post; the board went wonky…
By Chilao
April 17, 2006 02:25 PM | Link to this
LOL @Julia - had to read yours twice, to get that negate the positive and charge(+) the negative. sounding like some Cat I am series book, wasn’t there one where someone said everything the opposite of intended.
or am I thinking of one of the Indians in Little Big Man? LOL
By Justin
April 17, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this
As you ponder snuggling forever with your sweetheart, compare the lives of your bachelor and your married friends. The bachelors come and go as the mood strikes them, order their apartments with squalid abandon, drive Miatas or Harleys if they choose, and live in such pleasant dissolution as is consonant with continued employment. The married guy lives in a vast echoing mortgage beyond his means, drives sensible cars he doesn’t like, and loses his old friends because he isn’t allowed to hang out with them. Self-help books to the contrary, marriage does not rest on compromises, but on concessions. You will make all of them. Perhaps it doesn’t have to be this way. But it is this way. Your sweetheart has only one reason for marriage: to get her legal hooks into you. She doesn’t think of it in these terms, yet, and she has no evil intentions (at least she fakes so you won’t think so). She just wants a nice quiet home in the remote suburbs where she can live uneventfully, raise progeny, and keep her eye on you. If you think surveillance isn’t part of the contract, try going out late with your old buddies. Marriage is an institution founded on mistrust. If she thought you would stick around if not compelled, she wouldn’t need marriage. She wants monogamy, at least for you and, with some frequency, for herself. Marriage exists to control the male. She will, however, want to have children. Women do. At which point, God help you. Given the schools, drugs, latch-keyism consequent first to working parents and then to divorce, and the cultural pressure on children to be slatterns and dope-dealers, reproduction is a gamble. You may not even particularly like them, or they, you. Nobody talks about this, but how many people do you know who hardly talk to their grown children? And you’ve just tied yourself into twenty years of raising them. The moment Junior enters wherever it is that we are, Your sweetheart will have you screwed to the wall. She won’t think of it this way, yet. She’ll be delighted with the cooing bundle of joy, his little fingers, his little toes, etc. But divorce usually comes. The chances are two to one that she will file: Women are more eager than men to enter marriage, and more eager to leave it — with the kids, the house, and the child support. It won’t be amicable, not after seven years. You will be astonished at how ruthless she will be, how well she knows the law, and how utterly hostile to divorcing fathers the law is. You don’t understand how bad the divorce courts are. You probably don’t know what “imputed income” is. You think that “joint custody” means “joint custody.” Think again. Quite possibly you will have to support her while she moves with your kids to F******* with an Air Force colonel she met in a meat bar. In short, marriage often means turning twenty-five years of your life into smoking wreckage. Yes, happy marriages exist (I personally know of one) and there are the somnolent marriages of habitual contentment or, perhaps, of quiet resignation. But the odds aren’t good. Permit me an heretical thought. In an age when neither s-x economically needs the other, in which women do not need protection from wild bears and marauding savages, not in the suburbs anyway, perhaps marriage doesn’t make sense, at least for men. The divorce courts remove all doubt. A young fellow might do well to stay single, keep his DNA to himself, pick such flowers as he might find along the way, and live his life as he likes.
By Brian Curtis
April 17, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this
I find myself with the same starting-point question I had on the earlier divorce topic (prenups): Why is it so important to support and prolong marriages to begin with?
Seriously, folks. What’s the societal benefit that warrants getting the law involved? Do married couples contribute more to society? Are they better citizens? Is it important that as many people get and stay married as possible—-and if so, why?
The usual explanation is that “it benefits children”… but that’s a red herring. We don’t require married couples to have kids, and we don’t dissolve marriages that don’t produce them—-yet all the legislation and policies being discussed would apply equally to ALL married couples, regardless of parental status. So that’s not it.
Tell me, folks: Why the emphasis on marriage? Why make such a big deal of it that we need governmental action to protect it, like some sort of endangered species?
By Jack
April 17, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this
The tax cuts created jobs. Do you want 1/2 of all you worked for to go to Uncle Sam when you die? They’ll legalize pot when they do the fair tax.
By Billy
April 17, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this
RF — More raised for cancer than for AIDS? No, you’re probably right. But I think the government does fund more for AIDS than for cancer, especially when you look at the numbers who have each. Again, I say this knowing that I’m really not at risk of AIDS, but I could develop melanoma any day because my parents didn’t know in the late 70s/early 80s how dangerous the sun was…
By Brian Curtis
April 17, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this
I find myself with the same starting-point question I had on the earlier divorce topic (prenups): Why is it so important to support and prolong marriages to begin with?
Seriously, folks. What’s the societal benefit that warrants getting the law involved? Do married couples contribute more to society? Are they better citizens? Is it important that as many people get and stay married as possible—-and if so, why?
The usual explanation is that “it benefits children”… but that’s a red herring. We don’t require married couples to have kids, and we don’t dissolve marriages that don’t produce them—-yet all the legislation and policies being discussed would apply equally to ALL married couples, regardless of parental status. So that’s not it.
Tell me, folks: Why the emphasis on marriage? Why make such a big deal of it that we need governmental action to protect it, like some sort of endangered species?
By Eirik
April 17, 2006 02:32 PM | Link to this
My last comment since I don’t want to continue to contribute to hijacking this weeks subject, and I have no opinion about divorce.
The criteria for funding research should be if it is good research, which sources like NIH are very qualified to determine. There’s absolutely no reason that cancer research should restict AIDS research, or vice-versa.
By chuck
April 17, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this
Is something going on with the website again?
By GOB
April 17, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this
Justin - Are you always this cheery, or only on here? It must be really depressing to be your friend if this is all they hear.
By Jason
April 17, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this
Justin,
Excellent, Excellent, Excellent…
Wish I had read it 18 years ago before I met the harpie..
By kimberly
April 17, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this
What incentive does a pharmaceutical company have for curing ANY disease for which they already have expensive “treatment options” or lifetime maintenance drugs which bring in $BILLION$? I personally believe that scientists have developed numerous cures that we’ll NEVER see. Without a profit motive, there is NO motive.
Look how much they spend on advertising. They’ll never be satisfied until we all stand in line at CVS every month for the rest of our lives. Cures would be counter to the profit motive — hence, no cures.
By Chilao
April 17, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this
Chuck - yep, on the website, and it is only Monday.
By lozen
April 17, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this
Hope you don’t mind 72John but this needs to be said many more times:
What is truly repugnant are people who believe that sexuality outside of the narrow constraints they deem acceptable should be punishable by death, the belief that people who ARE infected with AIDS because of unprotected sex DESERVE to be sick and DESERVE to die.
By Julia
April 17, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this
I hate to say it but with the trillionaire drug companies/cartels running things I doubt that they WANT a cure. They would probably do everything in their power to prevent a real cure from seeing the light of day.
Justin-What about low-down men who misrepresent their income in court to get out of paying their fair share of child support? What about men who will not even see their children?
You make it seem as if all men are great fathers who are being raped by the courts. I won’t go into details but suffice it to say that my son’s “father” was NOT the one who was raped by the courts!
You seem to want men to stop marrying and having children. Is this what you’re really suggesting?
By lozen
April 17, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this
Hope you don’t mind 72John but this needs to be said many more times:
What is truly repugnant are people who believe that sexuality outside of the narrow constraints they deem acceptable should be punishable by death, the belief that people who ARE infected with AIDS because of unprotected sex DESERVE to be sick and DESERVE to die.
By Billy
April 17, 2006 02:43 PM | Link to this
Jack — When I die, half of what I have will not go to Uncle Sam. None of it will, because I won’t have an estate worth more than TEN MILLION DOLLARS!!! You can argue against the estate tax all you want, but I have the ultimate argue FOR it: Paris Hilton.
And you say the tax cuts created jobs, I say it Zero change in jobs is better than the creation of ten million jobs at the expense of ten million others. After the tax cuts and 9/11, there was nowhere for the economy to go, eventually, but up.
By chuck
April 17, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this
An example of research that is working is one on proteins and cancer being done by a doctor at UNC. He takes a biopsy of a melanoma, implants a certain type of protein in it and then puts it bak. The protein eats all of the melanoma cells and then travels throughout the body eating any cells that it can find. In his clinicals he has reversed melanoma death statistics. A friend of mine was part of the trial. Truly amazing.
By Archie
April 17, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this
Chuck you’re callous and un-christian like because you appear to hate the sinner and the sin and really only the sin of your choosing. As many have already said people have contracted the AIDS disease inspite of their behavior not just because of their behavior. In the post that I was referencing you referred to behavior. Of course everyone engaging in sexual behavior should be aware of diseases period but when anyone says it’s God’s punishment that a person catches a disease then they are callous. A friend of mine makes homosexuality a central reason for choosing a church. Wow!! I mean to focus on that with all of the good things to focus on with christianity, that’s what he chose as motivation to decide which church to attend. He mentioned other things but for him to even mention homosexuality it shows he has a major problem mentally.
By RF
April 17, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this
chuck- what do you bet a pharmaceutical company will buy the patent to the UNC protein and try to produce it as a drug that will take like ten years to get approved?? If possible, it’ll be squelched for a long, long time I’ll bet.
By kimberly
April 17, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this
The scientists who research and develop drugs, for the most part, DO care about what they’re doing. It’s not the scientists who decide what to fund, what to market, what to sit on, and what to sell. That’s the businessmen, CEOs and marketing whizz-heads; their actions indicate that they care only about profit.
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this
Wow, Justin. Do you guys have like an “anti-ex-wives club” or something? I wish you would put that much energy into moving forward with your life… Try to remind yourself frequently that there is nothing you can do to control people’s actions. But, there’s plenty you can do to control your reactions. Rest in the sweet knowledge that karma is real, and that whatever she does to hurt you will come back to her. Let that be enough for you.
I think I asked you before and you either didn’t answer me, or I missed it. How long ago did you divorce?
By chuck
April 17, 2006 03:04 PM | Link to this
but when anyone says it’s God’s punishment that a person catches a disease then they are callous.
Archie, you better check your glasses bud. I never said that. Have no idea where you got that. Oh…from what 72john said probably. Maybe if you are going to criticize me you ought to read MY posts instead of his.
RF, I wouldn’t be a bit surprised. I remember a story back in the late 70’s that came out about a patent on a device to increase gas mileage by 40% that was supposedly bought out by the oil companies. This will probably be no different. I am all in favor of reducing time to get a drug to market AND patent lengths as well. Medicine is way too important to make it exclusive. Certainly companies that develop new drugs should receive a royalty of some sort though.
By The72John
April 17, 2006 03:05 PM | Link to this
chuck- what do you bet a pharmaceutical company will buy the patent to the UNC protein and try to produce it as a drug that will take like ten years to get approved?? If possible, it’ll be squelched for a long, long time I’ll bet
I suspect Chuck doesn’t care about that, nor does he care that the pharmaceutical company will charge such outrageous prices for the drug that only the very wealthy will be able to afford it.
Yet again, in Chuck-land the poor are poor because they deserve to be.
Yay, Jesus!
By Justin
April 17, 2006 03:06 PM | Link to this
Driving the Divorce Rate: Who’s Teaching the Women?
August 3, 2003
by Art Lemasters
We know that with other things being equal, more children have healthier lives if they have both mothers and fathers in intact families. We have learned that with the high divorce rate, something needs to be done to train fathers to stay with their families and that far too many fathers abandon their wives and children, unwilling to abide by their responsibilities… We’ve been on the wrong track.
Wives have been filing for divorce at about twice the rate (more, in some places) of husbands. See the study report, “These Boots are Made for Walking: Why Wives File for Divorce” (Margaret F. Brinig and Douglas W. Allen, 2000, The American Law and Economics Association) in which an enormous number of divorce certificates from four U.S. states were analyzed.
Why have so many supposedly conservative ministers and socio-political writers sermonized exclusively on the problem of husbands abandoning or being “absent” from their wives and children? Are we really doing women any good service by refusing to truthfully define the problems instigating the high rate of divorce in order to make it lower? Are we doing the potential children of divorce any good by the same?
So how can we assure that fewer children will suffer from the ill effects of divorce? According to the Brinig and Allen report, no-fault divorce and “who gets the children” are the predominant motivations—not “cruelty” (“6%,” with all forms of cruelty, including adultery). We have allowed the saturation of our media and government with subjective feminist propaganda, full of exaggerations, to divert our attention from the prevalent causes of divorce. We need to know more about those prevalent causes before we can take effective action to lower the divorce rate.
Who’s teaching the women? We know that many socially conservative organizations are now teaching men to be good fathers. Think about it. Women are learning about issues of marriage and dealing with husbands through Women’s Studies courses (feminist and humanist propaganda), local “battered women’s shelters” (which disseminate more of the same in each community) and many other kinds of organizations that teach women to be independent—independent from husbands. Women are also taught by such organizations to know the incentives to divorce (propaganda and tactics that make divorce an easy lifestyle option for them). Most conservative organizations have been recipients of some of the same liberal, anti-family propaganda—many without knowing it.
The Brinig and Allen report should be sufficient to dispell the common myth that fathers, more often than mothers, abandon their families, but there are other sources of fact on the same issue. Two more references are “Who Divorced Whom: Methodological and Theoretical Issues” [Sanford L. Braver, Marnie Whitley and Christine Ng. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage Vol 20(1/2) 1993, p.1.] and the May 21, 1991 National Center for Health Statistics, Monthly Vital Statistics Report [Vol. 38, No. 12 (S) 2].
Many conservative organizations and organizations of faith are teaching men to be good fathers and husbands. That may solve part of the problem, and it is a good effort. Who will teach women to be good wives and mothers?
[Adapted from first publication to the Family Operations forum on February the 1st, 2001.]
By Justin
April 17, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this
HOW VICTIMIZED ARE DIVORCING WOMEN? By Cathy Young
On the heels of First Wives Club comes a more serious but equally tendentious treatment of the women-as-divorce-victims theme: journalist Karen Winner’s Divorced from Justice: The Abuse of Women and Children by Divorce Lawyers and Judges. With rhetoric out of a Gothic novel, Winner paints a grim picture in which divorcing women enter a world of “shadows and terror.” Trapped in a male-dominated system, they face economic ruin and the loss of their children. Winner credits Lenore Weitzman’s 1985 The Divorce Revolution as a trailblazer in documenting the abuse of women in divorce courts. Alas, she cannot use the factoid that made Weitzman one of America’s most quoted: that women’s income post-divorce drops 73 percent while men’s goes up 42 percent.
A fellow sociologist who recently reanalyzed Weitzman’s 1977 data found that the actual drop for women was 27 percent, the rise for men 10 percent; Weitzman has acknowledged her error. (There is evidence that, since non-custodial parents cannot deduct child support payments, while custodial parents don’t have to report them as taxable income, women come out ahead when taxes are factored in.)
An error of this size might be thought to cast doubt on the book’s value, but it doesn’t give Winner pause. Yet many of Weitzman’s other claims — picked up by Winner — are at odds with virtually all other research. She is the only scholar to find fathers’ non-payment of child support is not related to their financial hardships and that most of these men do not want more contact with their children.
Winner also says fathers who seek custody mostly do so as a ploy, to blackmail mothers into accepting less property and child support. Predictably, she concludes that gender-neutral custody laws hurt women and urges a return to explicit maternal preference.
This is a familiar argument. But those few researchers — such as Eleanor Maccoby and Robert Mnookin of Stanford — who have bothered to investigate rather than decry “custody blackmail” have found that it may occur but is far from common, both because few men stoop to such tactics and because an insincere custody bid may not work as a credible threat.
Winner contends, too, that under a veneer of neutrality the courts actually discriminate against mothers, giving custody to men in the majority of litigated cases. This pseudo-factoid deserves a separate analysis. For now, let’s just say it’s a whopper.
Undoubtedly, as Winner argues, far too many lawyers mistreat clients. But her contention that women are more vulnerable to such abuse is not backed by any research, only by more rhetoric that insultingly portrays women as guileless naifs. You’d never know that more husbands than wives in divorces have no legal representation.
Many studies show divorced men often feel helpless and abused by lawyers and the courts; Sanford Braver of Arizona State University has found they are more likely to feel this way than women, who are more satisfied by the legal process. In his study, 75 percent of the men and 35 percent of the women believed the system in divorce cases was slanted toward mothers; fewer than 10 percent of the women and no men said it was slanted toward fathers.
After years of deadbeat-dad-bashing, many scholars of both sexes now argue that many divorced dads vanish because they are disenfranchised, and that the way to help them be good fathers is to make sure they have a say in their children’s lives. Winner’s book is a throwback to a women good/men bad mind-set.
Sadly, it comes with a foreword from famed prosecutor Christopher Darden and blurbs from U.S. Congressman Jerrold Nadler — and conservative columnist Maggie Gallagher, undeterred by the quotations from radical feminists that pepper Divorced from Justice. Apparently, the idea of men as beasts and women as damsels in distress still has broad appeal.
Cathy Young is vice-president of the Women’s Freedom Network.
By Justin
April 17, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
The 13 Deadly Sins of Divorce By Gillis Triplett January 19, 2005
In the media, it is not uncommon to hear when certain people divorce, especially when the people are classified as celebrities or stars.
I call to your attention the very public divorces of music icon Lionel Richie versus Diane Alexander Richie, the famous NASCAR driver, Jeff Gordon versus Brooke Gordon, and the divorce battle between New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani versus Donna Hanover.
Many individuals who have traveled down the dark cold road of divorce, know very well how divorce can inflame bitter feelings, incite tense emotions and provoke people to commit harmful acts that they would not have otherwise committed. In this alarming article, I’ll expose The 13 Deadly Sins of Divorce. These are the harmful sins commonly committed by spouses once they are in the throes of divorce. Their aim? To dispense their own brand of vengeance, to somehow gain sympathy, or to gain the upper hand in their divorce court proceedings.
The women become so bitter that they engage in no holds barred male bashing. To these females, all men are dogs and they passionately convey that message to each and every female who crosses their path. These women join the ranks of other fuming feminists whose mission in life is to emasculate the male gender. They glory in the fact that they frequently succeed at eroding true masculinity and castrating real manhood. Their mantra, “Whatever a man can do, we can do better!” Other females resort to promiscuity, lesbianism, or turn to drugs and alcohol to bandage the pain caused by their divorce. Still others reduce themselves to willfully committing vengeful acts such as paternity fraud and marital fraud.
By then she was crying profusely and muttering statements such as, “I wished my parents would stop fighting, I can’t take this anymore,” and “Why can’t we be a normal family?” That precious little girl had become a victim of her parent’s nasty divorce and a casualty of their vicious child custody battle. Unfortunately, child custody battles have become the norm in our divorce prone society. Innocent children are forced into the fury as they are coaxed, coerced or bribed into choosing sides between parents. Although the child may not take the witness stand as in this case, the overflow of hostilities between the divorcing spouses will most likely leave deep emotional, psychological and social scars on the child’s life.
Members from the three families, Melissa’s, Ron’s and Ron’s new wife, all pleaded with Melissa not to drag the families through the family court. Melissa would not relent! She was adamant about obtaining full custody and forcing her ex-husband to start paying her child support. They had shielded their son from their divorce proceedings, but they could not do so in their child custody battle. In the end, Melissa won full custody and immediately removed their son from his stable household and familiar environment. That is when his life changed for the worse.
In his new home, there was no stability. His mother had various boyfriends and while she was out on dates, she would leave her son the remote control and microwave dinners. He spent most of his time watching music videos, MTV, BET and WWF; consequently his grades took a nose dive. He started displaying behavioral problems such as disrespecting his teachers and skipping school. Things escalated when he joined a gang and eventually started using drugs. While his life spiraled out of control, Melissa refused to call the boy’s father. Under no circumstances did she want her son communicating with his father or stepmother. She even prevented their son from attending his scheduled court ordered visits with his dad.
In the end, their son dropped out of school and was arrested on charges stemming from a gang related burglary. Melissa kept the boy’s father and stepmother in the dark about the proceedings until the trial was well underway. By that time it was literally too late for them to help. After the judge added up the aggravating sentencing factors: high school drop out, gang member, burglary, drug user, their 17-year-old son was given a 12 year sentence in an adult prison. As he was escorted away, Melissa broke down and cried. Her conscience had gotten the best of her. She went to her ex-husband and his wife and confessed. She admitted that she was bitter with Ron that he had remarried and that she had used their son to cause Ron as much pain as she possibly could. Her evil plot worked to perfection!
The Money Battle – Once a couple engages in the divorce court money battle, it seems as though they vacate all of their sensibilities, (moral and ethical). The soon to be ex-spouses turn into mortal combatants gripped in the war of all wars. If they loved each other, you wouldn’t know it. Not since they have switched gears and escalated into the - by any means necessary combat mode. This ruthless stance guides every decision that they make concerning their divorce. In this rigorous mindset, these spouses will resort to: hiding money in offshore accounts, using Internet tracking software, filing false financial affidavits, spying, stalking, forensic accounting, hiring private detectives, and lying to each other and about each other. And that is the short list! They will do and say whatever it takes to get the LION’S SHARE of the divorce proceedings, even if it means causing their soon to be ex to experience complete financial ruin!
The Scorched Earth Policy – This policy is actually taken from a classic military strategy. Prior to retreating, commanders would instruct troops to destroy everything: crops, trees, fuel, supplies, vehicles and anything that would be useful to the advancing army. In the divorce battlefield, some spouses are encouraged by divorce court attorneys to employ this policy. Most men know that the divorce court and family court is biased against them and they see no chance of getting a fair shake. By implementing the scorched earth policy, some men believe they can balance the field of combat. I followed one divorce case in which the husband, in one fail swoop, quit his high paying job, stopped paying insurance on the three family vehicles and emptied all of their bank accounts.
They owned numerous rental properties and he contacted the renters and advised them to stop paying rent. He told them to live there until his ex-wife served them with papers, then he destroyed all of the rental records. She had no way of knowing who paid what and when. In the empty rental units, he recruited vagrants and told them they could live there for free until someone kicked them out. He shredded any and all paperwork related to their marriage and got his name removed from most of the credit card debt and loans they had incurred together. In the end, his devious plot worked! His ex-wife received absolutely nothing in the final divorce court order because there was nothing left! Neither she nor her attorneys could make heads or tails of the financial tsunami created by her ex-husband.
False Allegations – In a move designed to gain the upper hand in the divorce court battle or child custody feud, some spouses will resort to filing false and unfounded allegations. This includes false allegations of domestic violence, child abuse and sexual molestation. Once a spouse is falsely accused, their life is put under the proverbial microscope of intrusive scrutiny. They are automatically assumed guilty until they prove their innocence beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt, and even then, it is virtually impossible for them to restore their tarnished name. The spouses who employ this revolting tactic, know the stakes very well. They intend to hurt their spouse in the worst possible way, including having them falsely incarcerated! They will do whatever it takes to win the divorce battle!
Abuse and Domestic Violence - The stress of a failing marriage inflames some spouses to retaliate in an unorthodox manner. They resort to committing abuse and violence. Their bitterness causes them to wield the weapons of abuse and domestic violence against their spouses, children and family members, and against the opposite sex. These men and women literally become human ticking time bombs.
Generational Curse - It goes without saying that divorce tears apart the fundamental basis of a child’s security: having both their father and their mother in their life. When a child becomes a victim of divorce, oftentimes, they take on the generational curse of divorce themselves. They in turn pass this curse on to their children. In some families the curse of divorce runs four and five or more generations deep. If you searched his or her family lineage, you will find no one who has had a stable marriage, or who knows what a healthy marriage looks like.
Child Abduction - Parental child abduction is a particularly heinous sin that surfaces in some divorce cases. It involves the wrongful removal or retention of a child by one parent in breach of the rights of the child to have contact, on a regular basis, with both parents. The parental abductor harms their children psychologically. They unwittingly destroy their child’s sense of trust and set them up to be a spiritually, socially and emotionally dysfunctional adult.
Patricia Hoff, the Legal Director for the Parental Abduction Training and Dissemination Project, explains: “Abducted children suffer emotionally and sometimes physically at the hands of abductor-parents. Many children are told the other parent is dead or no longer loves them. Uprooted from family and friends, abducted children often are given new names by their abductor-parents and instructed not to reveal their real names or where they lived before.” (Hoff, 1997).
Parental Alienation Syndrome - Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) is when hurt and embittered parents poison their children against their spouses. These parents barrage their adolescents, teenagers and adult children with a mixture of lies, false allegations and constant criticisms. Their intent? To persuade their child to hate or despise their other parent.
Parentification of Children – Some parents spin into an emotional downward spiral during or after their marital rupture. Emotionally, they become incapable of dealing with the realities of their divorce. When that happens, the parents expect, and in many cases, demand that their children behave as adults. The parent-child relationship is annulled and is replaced with a psychologically damaging (child replaces parent) relationship. The children are forced to take care of their moms or dads. They become the primary caretakers of their siblings and usually run the households. They provide their parents with a false sense of emotional security. Some parents use their children to meet their need for intimacy. Parents sleep with their children, (not sexually) just to have a shoulder to cry on, to have someone to hold and someone to talk to. They talk to their children about their problems and issues, sharing with them details that children should be shielded from. In turn, these children don’t get a chance to properly develop emotionally, and usually become dysfunctional marriage partners.
Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy – Some divorced parents have severe emotional and psychological meltdowns. Their instability causes them to use bizarre tactics to receive sympathy, leniency, nurturing, and to gain attention that they would not otherwise receive. Their bizarre tactics include: (a) self-inducing illnesses (b) faking sicknesses (c) faking injuries, and (d) fabricating injuries. They commit these acts against themselves and against their children. Their objective is not to seek external or monetary gains. As I stated previously, they are looking for attention, sympathy, to be nurtured and to receive leniency. Some of these men and women commit these acts as a last ditch effort to win back their ex-spouse.
Spousal Homicide – The divorce attorney’s mantra is: “Divorce is war!” In this epic war, there are times when one of the spouses sees the weapon of homicide as the only way to resolve or dissolve their marital conflict. For example, we will never know what was going through the mind of Matthew Bass in Edwardsville, Kansas. Police reports and court records paint an eerie picture of a man who refused to let his marriage end on any other terms but his own. On April 3, 2004, in the wee hours of the morning, police say that Matthew Bass stalked, ambushed and then killed his ex-wife and the man with whom she was living. Matthew later committed suicide.
In April of 2003, Tacoma Police Chief David Brame murdered his soon to be ex-wife in broad daylight. The two were in the middle of a contentious divorce. Family members of Brame showed evidence of how his wife filed false allegations and used other underhanded tactics in order to win the divorce war. It seems as though David had enough. The couple’s children were sitting in the vehicle that his wife was driving. At some point, Chief Brame put the children in his car, then went back to his wife’s car, shot her and turned the gun on himself. He committed this brutal act as the couple’s two small children looked on. Unfortunately, in spousal homicide cases, the children are very likely to witness the murder of their parent.
The Ripple Effect Without a question divorce carries with it terrible emotional, social, physical, psychological and financial consequences. More and more, the ripple effect of divorce is felt in subsequent generations. The 13 Deadly Sins of Divorce affects not only the spouses but also their children and their children’s children… if you are presently going through a divorce or contemplating one, I admonish you - do not commit any of these thirteen deadly sins! Do not attempt to alienate your children from their other parent no matter how much you may despise your spouse. Do not reduce yourself to using your child as a pawn. Both parents should agree to shield their child from the immense tensions associated with obtaining a divorce.
That means do not drag your child into your divorce court proceedings. To do so means you may very well be planting the destructive seeds of hatred, hostility and vengeance in their fertile minds and pliable hearts. Once these seeds germinate, you have set them on a sure collision course with psychological, emotional and social disorder. Do not violate your conscience by filing false charges of any kind. If an attorney suggests that you use any of these 13 Deadly Sins as a means to gain the upper hand in your divorce proceedings, do not follow their advice.
And for your sake, do not become bitter. I consistently receive calls from embittered spouses, both male and female. Some of the vengeful things they say they intend on doing to their spouse would cause your heart to tremor. One man thoroughly resented how his soon to be ex-wife was treating him. She had a shrewd bulldog divorce attorney who had succeeded at stripping his children out of his life. Faced with the fact that he may never see them again, this man was intent on killing his wife as a means to end their torturous divorce court battle. His words to me were, “She’s taken my children and everything I’ve worked hard for, I don’t care about going to jail… she’s already ruined my life.”
Was there any rhyme or reason to his murderous thoughts? Logically, the answer is no! But in the divorce court battlefield, logical and sane decisions are not the norm. In this highly polarized war torn battlefield, the emotions consistently run on extremely volatile and inflammable high-octane fuel. One spark is all it takes to ignite, detonate or launch the weapons of mass destruction such as false allegations, child abduction, the scorched earth policy, abuse, domestic violence or spousal murder.
It is an undeniable fact - divorce is stressful, painful and harmful, but it does not mean the end of your life. With God’s help, you can regroup, recover and move on. Do these deadly thirteen sins mean that you should stay in a harmful, abusive or violent marriage? A thousand times NO! If you have found yourself booby trapped in an abusive, violent or harmful marriage, to be blunt, getting out may be your only recourse to regaining your sanity, physical safety and peace of mind. I pray that you seek proper godly counsel and make the right decision.
By The72John
April 17, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
but when anyone says it’s God’s punishment that a person catches a disease then they are callous.
Archie, you better check your glasses bud. I never said that. Have no idea where you got that. Oh…from what 72john said probably. Maybe if you are going to criticize me you ought to read MY posts instead of his.
Oh please - is there ANYONE here who DOESN’T think that Chuck believes gay people get AIDS because they deserve it? What has he EVER said to make ANYONE think he has an ounce of real human compassion in his body?
By Renee
April 17, 2006 03:11 PM | Link to this
Justin, oh Justin….
By GOB
April 17, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this
Justin - Links, man, links!
By Jack
April 17, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this
Billy. So just because someone leaves over 10 million dollars when they die that gives the gov’t the right to half? BTW it is not 10 million.
By RF
April 17, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this
ZZZZZZZZZZ,zzzzz……what the?? OH, must have fallen asleep at my desk trying to read all the copy and paste.
Man, we’ve sure beaten some dead horses here today. According to my list of usual topics, there’s not much left, and it’s only Monday—can’t wait to see what tomorrow brings.
By Justin
April 17, 2006 03:16 PM | Link to this
Just Being Me,
It has been two years. Every time I settle into my life and forget about the past, she does something to upset my karma. She is pure evil.
By lozen
April 17, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this
Justin, I agree! I would just tweak it a tiny bit:
If I could offer a young (wo)man one piece of sage advice, it would be this: Don’t get married.
By The72John
April 17, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this
Justin, for the LOVE of GOD, STFU!
Don’t you know how to hyperlink?
By Chilao
April 17, 2006 03:22 PM | Link to this
Ditto on the Links(post links), this page is going to be a major nightmare to load come real soon. there is only so much page most computers can handle, (without the heavy and inefficient use of swapping) and we hit that last wednesday.
But at least Justin’s this time are pretty ON_TOPIC LOL
By Jack
April 17, 2006 03:24 PM | Link to this
Justin. She really did win. You show us everyday. Get revenge by living well.
By RF
April 17, 2006 03:24 PM | Link to this
Justin- half of evil’s power is us letting it happen. You got to get your karma under your control and learn to let her go. She’s an ex-wife, meaning you’ve got to let her go and find a way to ignore her evil ways. She’ll quit when you stop letting her get to you.
Seriously check on a divorce support group. They could give you a lot more support than we can. You would find it very, very helpful and comforting.
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 03:24 PM | Link to this
Yay, Jesus!
ROFLMBO!!! Hilarious, John.
Umm, seriously though, you know that he’s not a real representative of Jesus, right?
By Tim
April 17, 2006 03:24 PM | Link to this
hello… been reading all day… great entertainment :)
Jack… I agree with your 3:15 post
By Tim
April 17, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this
hello… been reading all day… great entertainment :)
Jack… I agree with your 3:15 post
By Julia
April 17, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this
Justin-Yes sir…getting $100/week child support…livin’ the good life! Move over Paris Hilton!!! LOL
We’ve gotten your message already. Men good/women evil. Thanks for the information on how we women are out to ruin men. You’re so sweet.
By Chilao
April 17, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
2 years, Justin? She even still on your mind? dang. you’d think it was real recent. flush, dude, flush
If I wanted to think about good Christians(once again, from my obvious twisted perspective…LOL) I would probably think of JBM and Julia. and Archie.
By Justin
April 17, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
Brian Curtis, If one can’t marry, then they can’t divorce. The divorce industry is big business. It employs a lot of people, extra judges, guardian ad litem, psychiatrists, counselors, plus the states receives federal money for cs they collect.
Jason, I wholeheartedly agree! I wish I knew also…
Julia, until laws and family court is fair. Men should go on a marriage strike and not procreate. Make the world’s oldest profession legal and employ surrogates!
GOB, I will hyperlink
Renee, I know, I know…sweetie, I’m trying…it is hard sometimes, especially with this topic.
lozen, marriage is not a good thing anymore if it ever was…
The72John, loose my hand and gwain
By Billy
April 17, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
Jack — No, it’s not ten million. It could be soon, though. It’s two million now, and estates are only taxed on the amount above that number. There are plenty of credits and deductions, and people who have estates of $2 million+ can afford to pay someone to find all the loopholes possible.
BTW — 2010 — Estate Tax is copmletely repealed, temporarily.
By Renee
April 17, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
Justin - I thought your answer would be 2 weeks not 2 years. Wounds never heal if you keep picking them.
On another note, send the cut and pastes to jbmnatl@yahoo.com. She likes reading material, and she can filter through it and post whats necessary. LOL
By Justin
April 17, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this
RF, Jack, she gets to me by using the children. I get angry because she hurts them. I am an adult and can take it. But, she is scarring the children. That is what ticks me off!
By Archie
April 17, 2006 03:38 PM | Link to this
Chuck perhaps it is you who need glasses because as you can see ,I think, I did say anyone, anyone and I did not say you but perhaps you reacted because the shoe fits. Like my friend who uses the Bible to justify his homophobia but ignores verses that say all men are created equal. My friend says things that don’t match the very Bible that he says he bases his beliefs on. I used the word anyone,specifically so that I would include anyone that feels like AIDS is a punishment from God.
A better spinoff to this topic would be how can we improve male-female relationships? I know some bloggers are gay but I can’t speak to that since we don’t have numbers on gay breakups and in addition I am a heterosexual. Male-female relationships are not going well and maybe they need to be redefined. I don’t know thus the reason for the question. I am still amazed at some of the answers I got last week but I was impressed with JBM’s honesty about women.
By kimberly
April 17, 2006 03:38 PM | Link to this
Justin, why did you choose to marry and reproduce with “pure evil?” Seriously. What was the primary motivation? Maybe by exploring your errors in judgment, you can help others here.
By Monica
April 17, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this
RF, Kimberly, et al… For those discussing the conspiracies within pharmaceutical companies, may I recommend a great book, Fatal Healing. It’s by a local budding author whose setting is a powerful pharmacy research corporation that creates the SARS virus because it has already created a cure for the disease. Entirely fictonal, of course. And much more interesting than this week’s blog topic.[http://highergroundstudios.com/shopping/productinfo.php?productsid=66&osCsid=e8a19bb20a6b9161fa34daf42c532cae]
By Julia
April 17, 2006 03:42 PM | Link to this
Thank you Chilao!
Justin, I’m sorry if I came across the wrong way before. You have a right to your anger certainly. I’ve been burned too. But I’ve moved on and I don’t harp on my injustices with the court system. (Though I was angry for awhile.) I still don’t judge all men in the world by one man who did me wrong.
By Archie
April 17, 2006 03:45 PM | Link to this
Chuck perhaps it is you who need glasses because as you can see ,I think, I did say anyone, anyone and I did not say you but perhaps you reacted because the shoe fits. Like my friend who uses the Bible to justify his homophobia but ignores verses that say all men are created equal. My friend says things that don’t match the very Bible that he says he bases his beliefs on. I used the word anyone,specifically so that I would include anyone that feels like AIDS is a punishment from God.
A better spinoff to this topic would be how can we improve male-female relationships? I know some bloggers are gay but I can’t speak to that since we don’t have numbers on gay breakups and in addition I am a heterosexual. Male-female relationships are not going well and maybe they need to be redefined. I don’t know thus the reason for the question. I am still amazed at some of the answers I got last week but I was impressed with JBM’s honesty about women.
By Renee
April 17, 2006 03:46 PM | Link to this
Kimberly - In Justin’s defense, I’m sure she didn’t start out “pure evil” or else I’m sure he would have never gotten with her (I think, anyway).
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 03:46 PM | Link to this
Kimberly, I refer you to Justin’s 2:20 where he (via cut-n-paste, albeit) explained that women don’t start out as evil, and in most cases, they are not evil. Divorce can bring out the worst in some people, and I think that’s what Justin’s saying happened to him.
By Monica
April 17, 2006 03:47 PM | Link to this
Sorry, maybe it will link this time…
http://highergroundstudios.com/shopping/productinfo.php?productsid=66&osCsid=e8a19bb20a6b9161fa34daf42c532cae
By RF
April 17, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this
Monica- read that! Pretty darn good, and certainly makes you think, doesn’t it?
Gotta go to a mega-meeting. Have a good evening all!
By kimberly
April 17, 2006 03:54 PM | Link to this
Justin, was she THAT pretty? Like, prettiest-girl-you-ever-met pretty, or prettiest-girl-that-would-speak-to-you pretty?
Thanks, Monica. I’ll check it out. People like to snicker at “conspiracy theorists” but what motivates big corporate executives besides profit? And what profit is there in curing what can be milked for decades per person? The math isn’t that complicated on this one.
By lozen
April 17, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this
Justin, Art lemasters is full of sh**!
Why have so many supposedly conservative ministers and socio-political writers sermonized exclusively on the problem of husbands abandoning or being “absent” from their wives and children. Duh! Maybe because this is the much, much, much bigger problem!
“Think about it. Women are learning about issues of marriage and dealing with husbands through Women’s Studies courses (feminist and humanist propaganda), local “battered women’s shelters” (which disseminate more of the same in each community) and many other kinds of organizations that teach women to be independent—independent from husbands.”
I done tole you, we gotta get those women out of them colleges where they are learning all that humanist, feminist propaganda. Oh, and damn them battered women shelters too; close em down. Women weren’t treated so bad back when they shut up when we said “Shut up!”
Justin, No. 1 - Nobody is going to read all that crap esp. after seeing by reading the paragraph above where he’s coming from. No. 2 - I seriously doubt you’ve been as mistreated as you think for no good reason.
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this
Awww, thanks Archie!
By Justin
April 17, 2006 03:59 PM | Link to this
Chilao, Only because she won’t move on…she is constantly in my Kool-aid!
Julia, I didn’t say all women are bad, nor all men good. Marriage gives every married woman a loaded gun. Whether she chooses to use it is up to her, but she still has one. J just chose not to shoot it.
www.blackcommentator.com/75/75frblack_families.html
www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/local/14238869.htm
www.deltabravo.net/custody/beatdead.php
By kimberly
April 17, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this
I appreciate y’all giving Justin the benefit of the doubt on the “pure evil” thing, but that isn’t going to help him. I’ve had some bad relationships, and I can ALWAYS look back and see warning signs I ignored as well as misplaced motivations on my part. I got marred for the “wrong reasons” while ignoring blaring red flags. When I came to understand those, I was able to move forward while not repeating the same mistakes. (Always willing to make new ones! Haha!) Justin either ignored a gut feeling that something wasn’t right, or he married for the wrong reasons, or he had totally unrealistic expectations. Help this nice young man comprehend HIS part in this mistake, and you’ll help him for a lifetime! {:->
By Mara
April 17, 2006 04:03 PM | Link to this
Archie - my male/female relationships are doing just fine, thanks. But then, I bided my time until I was mature enough to know who I was before committing myself to marriage. I knew what I wanted in a man and why. I also knew what I was prepared to offer and what things I would never agree to. And my husband and I talked seriously about money, children, expectations, and what we wanted from marriage before we wed.
Perhaps it the differences in expectations that cause many marriages to fail. It seems to me that a great many men still expect they’ll be marrying Molly Homemaker, disregarding the reality that their intended has a thriving career of her own. On the other hand, I’m sure that there’re women who marry thinking that they will be Molly Homemaker while their intended looks forward to a comfortable 2-income future…
By Renee
April 17, 2006 04:10 PM | Link to this
Granted Kimberly, but it takes making a mistake to learn from your mistakes. Therefore, I think your argument would hold true if he had a pattern of picking the wrong person. I would venture to say that he could use this experience to assist him in picking the right girl next time, or to know what to look for when presented with a relationship potential. This maybe his first learning experience, therefore explaining the large amount of hurt he expresses. Of course, I don’t know for sure and you don’t know, but that would be my deduction, and if I’m wrong, I’m sure he will set me straight.
By lozen
April 17, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this
ways to improve male-female relationships:
men need to stop thinking the most important thing is how beautiful and sexy she is and think about character.
women need to stop thinking the most important thing is how cute and sexy he is and think about character.
men and women should learn the difference between lust and love.
little boys should put their hands over their ears when their dads start talking like, “Women! Can’t live with em and can’t live without em! Dumb women! They just never make sense! Women! They just want your money. You can’t trust a one of them!”
little girls should put their hands over their ears when their mothers start talking like, “Men! They are just like having another kid. They act like babies. They never grow up. You can’t trust a one of them.”
Marriage needs to be illegal until the age of 35!
By Justin
April 17, 2006 04:19 PM | Link to this
Julia, no problem…I understand.
Kimberly, I have found many women know how to fake and be the woman they think you want in order to get what they want…marriage and children. She was very good at faking and then I saw a totally different person after marriage.
Renee, if I had one inkling of how she really is…I would’ve walked away before the wedding.
Kimberly, yes, she was attractive, well-educated and comes from a Christian family. I must say her family is sane but she has some mental issues.
Archie, I think women and men have a hard time trusting each other now, especially in the Black community. I wouldn’t know where to begin to bring men and women back together except one area. Make the divorce laws equitable and fair. Then, work on why relationships fail…
By Tim
April 17, 2006 04:20 PM | Link to this
daaaang… I gotta wait until I’m 35 to get the free blender??? Shoot!
By Chilao
April 17, 2006 04:20 PM | Link to this
I’m sure that there’re women who marry thinking that they will be Molly Homemaker while their intended looks forward to a comfortable 2-income future…
Mara, you know my second ex? LMAO
so you meet a woman that seems to have it all together, until you learn she really would rather not work, and if it keeps you(husband) in the poorhouse, oh well, ain’t love grand LOL and to think with Shaunt’s recommended counseling, I could be even more broke now than I was then.
Since that was not in MY plans, why she ex2. Of course she did not like me to call it a con she ran, but that was exactly how I looked at it… LOL
By Just Being Me
April 17, 2006 04:24 PM | Link to this
Kimberly, you sound as though you and only you have the one and only answer for Justin. Just because you can look back and see warning signs doesn’t mean that everyone can.
To say that he had to have fit into one of three categories (ignored warning signs, married for the wrong reasons, or had unrealistic expectations) is somewhere between close-minded and judgmental, IMHO. How do you know she didn’t have an experience that caused her to become violent when there were no previous warning signs? How do you know she didn’t go through some sort of mid-life crisis that caused her to cheat on him? How do you know she didn’t suffer from post-partum depression so seriously that it completely sapped her of all the personality he fell in love with? How do you know she didn’t just turn into a jerk over a period of time?
Of course it’s possible that he’s to blame, but it is equally possible - and worth considering - that she’s to blame.
Furthermore, I don’t really think it’s realistic to expect us (any of us here) to “help him comprehend his part in the mistake.” First off, maybe there was no mistake. Maybe they just grew apart, and as they began to divide assets, she became bitter. Secondly, how on earth can we possibly know enough about his situation to help him comprehend his part on a friggin blog? This isn’t an hour long episode of Dr. Phil, this is a blog. We’re here to discuss issues that affect the masses, and although we get off-track from time to time, we rarely get deep into one person’s life and/or relationship. The most we can do is what’s already been done, refer him to some professionals that can really help him.
By Archie
April 17, 2006 04:25 PM | Link to this
Thanks Mara for responding. I spun off because if we’re going to curtail something we may as well start before things go downhill. Ladies, why don’t some of y’all cook? Everybody has to eat so why is it hard for some of y’all to cook for the entire family not just yourself? Women are very different and certainly have more choices but the house still has to be kept and I wonder why some women just struggle so much with housework. Obviously not every guy has a complaint but if we are going to curtail divorce why not deal with consistent complaints from both sides. We hear so much of the complaints from the woman’s side and it is because of that —that I don’t understand why today’s ladies don’t seem to keep up the housework. Of course as detailed several times we,men, have alot of problems but there has to be some ideas on how to improve our relationships. I read somewhere that the average wedding costs over 32,000 dollars, that’s a lot of money to turn around and be very cold with your spouse or non-caring with that spouse the minute some unpleasantries come up. I think if we work harder at male-female relationships topics like this will be easier to deal with. Ladies help me out. Gentleman chime in too.
By Tim
April 17, 2006 04:26 PM | Link to this
daaaang… I gotta wait till I’m 35 to get the free blender??? shoot!!!
By Justin
April 17, 2006 04:26 PM | Link to this
My ex was very career-oriented, but after the children were born, she wanted to stay home. I told her we have to make plans for her to be stay at home mom. It isn’t something you do on a whim. There must be a financial plan. Then, after going back to work, she accuses me of not supporting her career and she wants to get another master’s degree. I told her to go for it. Then, she accuses me of not wanting her to stay at home. I couldn’t win. It is my fault for marrying the wrong person and not seeing the signs before the children were born. I take responsibility for that.
Renee, you are correct. I have never been through anything like this before. I apologize again.
lozen, I agree. Marriage should be postponed until a certain age and sufficient testing…hehehe
By Chilao
April 17, 2006 04:27 PM | Link to this
Marriage needs to be illegal until the age of 35!
So are we back to my suggestion a few weeks ago, during the put a waiting period on divorce legal action week, that people not be allowed to marry until they have been together 5 years, and adding, get 20 witnesses to state they have a nice stable relationship, no abuse, etc etc. LOL
By Justin
April 17, 2006 04:33 PM | Link to this
Just Being Me,
I thought I made a good selection and did things the right way. Before I married, I owned my own home, two vehicles, a motorcycle, lots of money in the bank and a great career. I respected women. She didn’t have a lot of assets but I don’t look at people for what they own but their character. She definitely fooled me. I got her her first job position here.
Now, she is living in a home which was mainly paid for by my assets and equity in my first home, has a six figure salary, has control of the children, most of the marital assets, plus 23% of my pre-tax income in cs. And, she is still not satisfied until she ruins me. That seems to be her goal. And no, I didn’t cheat. I just got tired of having her treat me like a child and disrespect me. Some women feel they have to control their man/train their man to have a relationship.
By Justin
April 17, 2006 04:36 PM | Link to this
I knew things were going wrong when she wanted to trade in the engagement ring I gave her for a larger stone. This was after the wedding…she wanted to better her friends… you know, my stone is bigger than your stone issue…
And, because her ex-boyfriend did her wrong, she thought I was going to do the same. She eventually drove me away. It got to the point where I hated going home.
By Justin
April 17, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this
I read an article some time ago about some women think the talents that make them successful in their career will not necessarily make them successful in their marriage/relationship. They need to focus on different things to make a relationship successful.
As I stated before, I can move on but when you have someone constantly needling you using the children, it wears on you. I don’t care if she hates me, just don’t use my children to get back at me. I can take it, they can’t.
By kimberly
April 17, 2006 04:42 PM | Link to this
JBM, wow… is this “kimberly is a such a b—-h day” and i forgot to wear the t-shirt? Obviously he is suffering, and I was just trying to help. Do I know the whole story? No, of course not. I was trying to get him to elaborate and see something beyond “She’s evil!” which is where he seemed to be stuck. Actually this blog IS a Dr. Phil substitute for some of us. See, he acknowledged not seeing some signs. That’s progress, IMO! Yay, Justin! I have hope that he can work through his anger. Are you trying to tell me what I’m allowed talk about? Heh….
By Justin
April 17, 2006 04:45 PM | Link to this
Archie, You are right in the spending on the wedding. It is all a big show! Also, men are expected to do the yard work and then expected to help with the housework. Whatever happened to team work. If I help with the housework, I very well expect some help with the work in the yard!
And, please learn to cook something other than spaghetti! Yes, I know how to cook!
By Iamjustrealsorryforallusporemen
April 17, 2006 04:48 PM | Link to this
We gotta stop these women from learnin’ how to be independent in them evil women’s studies classes and battered shelters. Back to the good ole days when a man could knock his wife around a little bitty bit when she needed it. Back to good ole family values when women knew their place and men were the king of the castle. Women are ruining the family! Hell, they’re ruining the country. They’re using birth control, having sex all over the place, getting educamated, makin’ their own money, paying fer their own Mercedeeeees and divorcin’ their good, faithful, loving husbands. They think nuthin’ of just havin’ a kid without even havin’ a daddy for it! The more educamation they git, the harder it is to fool em anymore. When you tell em they’re b*** now they just smile, and then they file! When you tell em this is six inches ____, they studied algebra dude, they don’t believe that anymore.
By kimberly
April 17, 2006 04:52 PM | Link to this
Justin, it hurts when you know you did the right and honorable thing by your mate, and they screw you over anyway. I can relate. I used to pray a LOT in those days. “God please help me be a good wife and make this right.” (I finally realized I couldn’t make it right when he was an angry drunk, screwing a teenager and trying to make me feel like nothing.) Now, after some years, knowing that I did the right thing even though he didn’t does actually make me feel better. It’s my reflection I see in the mirror, not his. Using the kids against you is wrong, and that anger is not likely to subside until that behavior stops. Be brave, and look for ways to counter that behavior to lessen it’s impact on you and your children. A professional might be of some use there. Good luck!
By lozen
April 17, 2006 05:00 PM | Link to this
Archie, “Ladies, why don’t some of y’all cook? Everybody has to eat so why is it hard for some of y’all to cook for the entire family not just yourself? Women are very different and certainly have more choices but the house still has to be kept and I wonder why some women just struggle so much with housework.”
I know you couldn’t be speaking of the ladies I work with who are in the office and car about nine or ten hours a day, (just like their husbands) and then for some reason are expected to go home and do all the cooking and all the cleaning for the family with no help from the husbands!
By Mara
April 18, 2006 07:26 AM | Link to this
well said, lozen. Well said.
Archie, this is exactly what I was talking about regarding some men still expecting cookin’, cleanin’, and washin’ from their mate, regardless of whether she, too, works a full day. There’re a lot of us that truly have bought into the “equal partnership” theory of marriage. You know, the idea that there is no job that’s a “womans job” nor any that’re “mens jobs”? Of course, there are certain things that fall naturally. I always clean the cat box because I had the cat when we got married and it just seemed like it’d be my responsibility. He does most of the yard work, not because I won’t but because he doesn’t like me playing with “his” tools. (he lets me drive the lawnmover…sometimes LOL!)
The idea that it’s the womans responsibility to keep the house up and cook for the family despite working full time is rediculous. If a man marries expecting to get a maid, cook, lover, and second-income provider…he’s likely to be as disappointed in his mate as she will be with the marriage.
By candide
April 18, 2006 07:28 AM | Link to this
Defend traditional marriage! Incest, physical abuse, mental abuse, religious indoctrination, hypocrisy, stupidity.
By Jack
April 18, 2006 07:59 AM | Link to this
Wow. I leave a little early and miss a lot of great stuff.
Exactly what is wrong with traditional marriage?
By Bruce
April 18, 2006 08:04 AM | Link to this
Better question is what is wrong with candide? Hey Kimberly do you think we could help him too?
By chuck
April 18, 2006 08:06 AM | Link to this
Archie, maybe you not only need glasses, but a test for early onset of Alzheimer’s…another devestating disease that gets less funding than AIDS. Your exact words were:
Chuck you’re callous and un-christian like because you appear to hate the sinner and the sin and really only the sin of your choosing. As many have already said people have contracted the AIDS disease inspite of their behavior not just because of their behavior. In the post that I was referencing you referred to behavior. Of course everyone engaging in sexual behavior should be aware of diseases period but when anyone says it’s God’s punishment that a person catches a disease then they are callous.
So you refer to me as “callous” then say that “anyone” who says blablabla is callous, but it wasn’t referring to me. Now you can try to WEASEL if you want to. That is certainly your right to say whatever you want to say, but it is disengenuous at best to say that the comment was NOT referring to me. At its worst, it was an outright LIE. Again I ask “When did I say that?”
By Bruce
April 18, 2006 08:20 AM | Link to this
Better question is what is wrong with candide? Hey Kimberly do you think we could help him too?
By Jack
April 18, 2006 08:22 AM | Link to this
You stirred it up good yesterday Chuck.
By Nikita
April 18, 2006 08:30 AM | Link to this
Justin, I know you had a bad situation, but it continues to pain me that you seem to project that experience upon all women.
In my house, I (the woman) support the both of us, both of whom are in college as well. I also cook and shop (no small task, since it takes several hours of time & energy each week) and do the lawn & garden and some limited cleaning — mostly in the kitchen. I don’t clean in general, however. And if the house gets too messy, I hire a maid. ‘Cause, honestly, I am entirely too busy and life is entirely too short for me to spend it doing things I hate, regardless of whether society considers them to be my job or not.
Oh, and the only cars we own are the ones I pay for.
By chuck
April 18, 2006 08:40 AM | Link to this
Like the song says Jack, “Let’s give ‘em something to talk about”.
By chuck
April 18, 2006 08:40 AM | Link to this
Like the song says Jack, “Let’s give ‘em something to talk about”.
By chuck
April 18, 2006 08:48 AM | Link to this
OH, OH, OH, and me too Kimmie? I’m a callous and un Christian-like homophobic scum of the earth, who hates children, the poor, and gay people. Oh yeah, and I beat my wife and children and kick the dogs. Did that about cover it john?
By Mara
April 18, 2006 08:49 AM | Link to this
Jack, there’s nothing wrong with “traditional” marriage, per se. The problems arise when one person expects traditional gender roles and the other expects that responsibilities will be shared. If both parties agree that this is the kind of relationship they want, fine. Most women I know would be shocked if their intended expected them to shoulder all (or even most…)of the domestic responsibility. See, the way it appears to me is that a lot of men are still expecting to marry June Cleaver. Unfortunately for them, June is a fictitious stereotype that most women have long since grown out of.
By Monica
April 18, 2006 08:52 AM | Link to this
Mara, Good 4:03 post yesterday. My husband and I also discussed those matters before we were married. We both decided that children were great, but if we didn’t have any, then that was okay too. Being a Christian and going to church are very important to me, and I didn’t date men who didn’t go to church: not because I am self-righteous or holier-than-thou, but I just didn’t see the point in wasting time (mine or his) with someone who had a different value system than I did (though I was accused of being a self-righteous b** once!). And, like you, I didn’t start “looking” for a husband until I was comfortable with myself first. I hate that Jerry Maguire “You complete me” crap! Who needs anyone else to make you a complete person? If you’re not happy with yourself, you won’t be happy with anyone else. That’s my Dr. Phil philosophy contribution for the day. :)
By Julia
April 18, 2006 08:55 AM | Link to this
I’ll gladly be June Cleaver as long as I don’t have to hold a 9 hour job outside the home at the same time. I’ll gladly stop working and stay home to be with my son and watch him grow up. The housework will be done, dinners ready at 5:30, etc.
But if I have to continue to work just as my husband does then he’s going to have to share the household chores and cooking. You know-equality-I’ll cook/you do dishes,etc.
By Julia
April 18, 2006 08:59 AM | Link to this
For the record, being a single mom I’m already doing all of that by myself including the upkeep of a house and yard. So if/when I get married I certainly expect a little help in a few areas. (But honestly right now I’d settle for the extra income. Every time I get ahead it seems something else at the house breaks. Yesterday it was the garage door. Last week it was the A/C.)
By Jack
April 18, 2006 09:01 AM | Link to this
The Mrs. and I shared everything. Cooking, cleaning, diapers ETC. (plus my sun rises and sets for her) That is the secret to staying married.
By Julia
April 18, 2006 09:03 AM | Link to this
Did not mean to make it sound like I’d marry just anybody for the added income. LOL
I just meant that right now it’s a struggle-financially.
By Monica
April 18, 2006 09:05 AM | Link to this
Julia, I don’t know how you do it! My husband is a high school coach, so I get a small taste of single parenthood during ball season, but there is still no comparison. It’s hard enough working full time and being a mom when there are two of you; I can’t imagine going solo. You’re my hero!
By Renee
April 18, 2006 09:05 AM | Link to this
I am quite happy with myself, but my partner completes me.
Traditional marriage is fine, as long as both parties are okay with it. I have no problem cooking, cleaning, or anything else.
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this
Okay, Kimberly. Since you seem content to believe that anything I say to you is an attack, how about I only address you when I agree with you.
Unlike your post, there was absolutely no sarcasm in mine, there was no venom, no anger, nothing that looked like an attack - it was just me expressing my disagreement with what you said. But, this isn’t the first time you thought I was jumping down your throat when I was doing nothing of the like.
So, like I said, I’ll limit my comments to “Right on, Kimberly!!!” when addressing you.
By Karen L. Sacandy
April 18, 2006 09:12 AM | Link to this
I handle divorces in my law practice. Justin’s comments are 85% right on. The law favors the mother in almost every circumstance. This is changing slightly, but so slowly as to be useless. The rest of what I have read here is sophmoric tripe, not worth the time it took to type.
For all of you glib writers: human beings are not the unsocial creatures you wish them to be. But I won’t waste my breathe on swine.
It saddens me to see before me the explanation of why Americans are not having children, while illegal immigrants are. Americans will die off, while foreigners will have the benefit of our ancestors’ blood. Our laws favor those not in our system. Those in it are trapped and bludgeoned.
Men have done the math, and finished the calculations. They know that marriage law as currently applied, is applied with bludgeon force against them. It is only the very bravest or most foolish of young men that now marry.
And all of your glib comments won’t erase the facts of the destroyed lives. Divorce is the destruction of the deepest ties human beings have. It is the destruction of entire plans for life, and ruins all the careful calculations which people make to provide for their future, and their children’s future.
While you here are glib and flip, there are others trying to figure out how to prevent the carnage of destruction and heartache divorce brings. Justin gets it. The rest of you are just voyeurs. Without serious people like Justin, this problem will not be solved, and more innocent people will be destroyed, while the guilty will walk away with all the pot, and smile at how cleverly they gamed the system.
By Bruce
April 18, 2006 09:13 AM | Link to this
The way I look at it is, it is my home too. I help dirty, I help clean. Do we split duties 50/50, nope. But I woudl not trust her to hang a picture but she MUST tell me when i have it in the right place.
By Hadden Knough
April 18, 2006 09:14 AM | Link to this
All I know is that yesterday we went with our college age son to a pizza joint for lunch. It was one of those local pseudo-hippydippy outfits, in fact there was bunch of flower children straight out of the ’60s - honest to God - squinting and shielding their eyes in the midday sun as they climbed out of of their hippymobile. They looked really, really, really hungry.
Anyway, my son orders a Greek side-salad along with his pizza, only he doesn’t want onions or olives or anything but lettuce, feta cheese, and dressing. The counter-culture kid who was taking our order just looked at him for few seconds and then suggested it would be smarter and cheaper in the long run to get a regular side-salad and add feta cheese instead of trying to make a Greek salad into something it’s not.
So, before you jump into anything with Diane’s, “How we define marriage is as fluid and liberating as our imagination”, bull sh## ringing in your ears, remember the dreadlocked young retro-revolutionary and his side-salad philosphy, and perhaps in the long run you won’t have a need for a no-fault divorce.
Maybe hippies aren’t so bad after all.
By Bruce
April 18, 2006 09:14 AM | Link to this
The way I look at it is, it is my home too. I help dirty, I help clean. Do we split duties 50/50, nope. But I woudl not trust her to hang a picture but she MUST tell me when i have it in the right place.
By Mara
April 18, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this
Justin @10:38 yesterday - “You would be amazed at how many women leave a marriage because the man doesn’t communicate the same as they do in a marriage. Most women tend to want to talk about everything extensively. Most men tend to stick to the facts and say what they need to say.”
I think perhaps I’ve uncovered at least one thing that contributed to Justins unhappy marriage. The feeling I got from this post was that his ex kept trying to talk to him (perhaps about feeling isolated when she was home alone with the kids or feeling overwhelmed when she went back to school?) and Justin got tired of her constant yammering and just wished she’d STFU. If this was the situation, I don’t find it surprising at all that their marriage broke up. Nobody likes to feel like they aren’t being heard, or their feelings don’t matter.
I could be wrong, but it looks like Justin has a real problem with communication.
By Nikita
April 18, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this
Thanks, Karen, for enlightening all us troglodytes who don’t believe that women are evil or designed to dsteal men’s money.
As to traditional marriage — nothing’s wrong with them, but they don’t work for me. What’s wrong is compelling people to enter into them when they don’t fit the participants.
By Justin
April 18, 2006 09:30 AM | Link to this
Kimberly, I know what you mean. It seems nice people always get caught up with a mean partner. I try to do the right thing, because I alone have to answer for how I treat others. You are right, we have to look in the mirror and be happy with what we see. Hopefully, one day, my girls will know how much I loved them and supported them. And, hopefully, they will know their mother’s role in everything and her tricks. And, she calls herself a Christian. I am not judging her but revenge is the thing on her mind, for how dare I think she isn’t perfect because she thinks she can do no wrong.
Nikita, I don’t think all women are bad. However, the family law courts do give women the upper hand. A father can be a saint and it will still be a battle to even get joint custody of his children. Right now, I am trying to figure out what to do with my children for the summer. She will still receive cs for the time I have the children. I can’t afford camp. People tell me to fight her in court but that requires money I don’t have. She is so selfish, she won’t spend the cs money she will receive when she doesn’t have the children on their camp.
By Justin
April 18, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this
Mara, I communicate but I don’t communicate well when the other person is yelling. At that point, I will walk away. I can’t stand nagging.
We went to counseling and even the counselors said we shouldn’t be married. She tried to find a counselor who agreed with her and that we should stay together. We were just too different. She grew up in a household where her mother ruled her father. I grew up in a traditional household. That was the main problem.
Karen knows that the laws favor women. If you don’t believe it, sit in a family law courtroom for a day and see for yourself. See how the judges dismiss the man’s witnesses but yet hears the woman’s witnesses. See the real reason men shouldn’t marry.
By The72John
April 18, 2006 09:43 AM | Link to this
OH, OH, OH, and me too Kimmie? I’m a callous and un Christian-like homophobic scum of the earth, who hates children, the poor, and gay people. Oh yeah, and I beat my wife and children and kick the dogs. Did that about cover it john?
Yep, that about covers it. I would say this sums up the totality of what it means to be Chuck. Anyone disagree?
By chuck
April 18, 2006 09:43 AM | Link to this
Not to change the subject, if there actually is one, but Julia…I need to apologize to you. I was a little harsh yesterday. When you first showed up on this blog you made a few statements and everybody that usually attacks me, attacked YOU. It was like you turned off a switch and changed your whole persona, to be popular with the crowd. I have a hard time respecting that. I think we ought to be genuine in our Christianity.
I could probably say things in a nicer way, but I don’t really believe in a lot of fluff. For one thing, I type too slow to put all of the little niceties in there, and I don’t have unlimited time to post…usually just between classes or in planning periods or lunch. For another, while I am indeed blunt, I am also on point as far as the Bible goes. The few times that I have been a little mean-spirited, like calling john a moron, have also been done to make specific points about debate or semantics.
I try to make my posts instructive. There are many “lurkers” out there who never post, but read this blog who want to know WHAT the Bible says about these issues. I try to provide that information. The vast majority of my posts have to do with political/social issues that I address from a Biblical perspective if there is one that specifically addresses it and a common sense perspective otherwise. I am decidedly conservative, because having studied scripture for well over 30 years, I am sure those ideals are for the most part Biblical. I don’t agree with everything the Republican party does…in fact, I find myself disagreeing more and more lately, but there is really not a viable alternative.
I believe in the concepts of helping the poor and sick and those that find themselves in hard times, but I don’t find those things to be in the purview of the government but rather, the Church. The Constitution does not give that authority to the federal government just like it doesn’t give them authority over education, abortion, etc. They are usurping powers that by right, belong to the states.
I don’t believe in a namby-pamby, feel good gospel that has no power for changing the world around us. I believe in a HOLY God who loved us enough to give His only Son to die for our sins, yet still holds us accountable for what we do with His Son. His love is beyond our power to comprehend, BUT so is His sense of justice. This God is immoveable and unchangeable. He doesn’t “adapt” who He is because society changes. Sin is still sin. Just as there is a Heaven, there is ALSO a hell. So when you criticize my message, remember that one thing. A watered down faith is useless.
By Jack
April 18, 2006 09:49 AM | Link to this
Karen. Thank you for ripping everyone on the blog. You are sooooooo superior. Got a joke for you. What do you call 100 lawyers on the bottom of the ocean? A good start.
By The72John
April 18, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this
To sum up what Chuck say - Inqusition = Good. Love and Compassion = Bad.
That’s basically it. He’s evil. Scum. Trash.
‘Nuff said.
By Archie
April 18, 2006 09:52 AM | Link to this
Thanks ladies for responding. Lozen, I am writing from the perspective of men that do housework. The reason I wrote what I did is because you have men that do yardwork and housework so that’s the motivation behind writing the way I did. Many women of today simply struggle with housework and I don’t think that some ladies understand that being equal means you still have to do something. I don’t think some of the ladies understand that your fellow ladies struggle and this is a constant complaint from today’s men. Even though both male and female put in a full day housework still needs to get done. I am not talking the ladies that do perform equally, I am talking about a growing number that use the “I work fulltime” excuse to not do much around the house. It may not fit anyone here but it does fit some ladies somewhere and I know personally of a man that washed both cars,prepared dinner, and cleaned restrooms at home and that’s not unusual in this day and age. What’s happening with that type of woman?
By Jack
April 18, 2006 09:55 AM | Link to this
“There are many “lurkers” out there who never post, but read this blog who want to know WHAT the Bible says about these issues.”
Yes indeed. Uh huh. OK. Right.
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 09:59 AM | Link to this
An offensive message is useless, too.
By Monica
April 18, 2006 10:00 AM | Link to this
Archie, are there kids involved in the marriages you describe? If I have a dirty bathroom, a 5-year-old son who wants me to play Candyland with him, and a 2-year-old son who wants me to hold him, guess what I am going to pick? The bathroom can wait!
By chuck
April 18, 2006 10:00 AM | Link to this
BTW, Julia, case in point…yesterday’s post on AIDS funding. All I did was state a fact that we spend more money on AIDS research in the United States than we do on cancer research and a number of other diseases that affect WAY more people than does AIDS. I didn’t call it a “gay disease”, I didn’t blame anyone, yet it was roundly assumed that I want all homosexuals and little children in Africa to die of AIDS. Many of the people on this blog are so caught up in their sin that all they know how to do is attack.
That is one of the reasons mainsream America votes Republican. They don’t hear any solutions from the left, only ad hominem attacks. When you can’t win the argument on merit, try to win it by smear tactics. That’s what goes on here and you should really try to understand that.
By The72John
April 18, 2006 10:00 AM | Link to this
spelling seems to be failing me today…”says” and “inquisition”
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 10:02 AM | Link to this
Justin, did you look into a support group, or are you content being angry and resentful?
By RF
April 18, 2006 10:02 AM | Link to this
good one Jack!! I also like your approach to marriage. People seem to have forgotten the simplicity of a good relationship. I bet the Mrs. probably adores you too, and that’s the way it should be.
By lozen
April 18, 2006 10:02 AM | Link to this
Karen Sacandy, Wow Karen tell us how you really feel about us your first time posting on the blog. I don’t undeerstand why you wasted your time writing to a bunch of swine but I’m guessing since you’re a lawyer that Justin had to pay you something!
Why shouldn’t mothers be favored by the law? Isn’t it mothers who have the children, and mothers who do 99 percent of the childcare in 99 percent of families?
Do you know that things used to be just the opposite before the early 1900’s and the first wave of the women’s movement. Mothers back then had no claim at all on their children and many women stayed in terrible marriages because they would lose their children if they left. The law back then always favored the father! Funny how things change huh? Aren’t you being a little melodramatic? In my opinion marriage is not by any stretch of the imagination the deepest tie we have. In many societies it has never been viewed as such. Our ties to our children, our siblings, our parents (sometimes) are much deeper and more basic. The friendships I’ve established with women have been much deeper and more fulfilling than my relationship with my husband ever was. The rest of what I have read here is sophmoric tripe, not worth the time it took to type. For all of you glib writers: human beings are not the unsocial creatures you wish them to be. But I won’t waste my breathe on swine.
Oh well goodness, aren’t you the great communicator yourself?
It saddens me to see before me the explanation of why Americans are not having children, while illegal immigrants are. Americans will die off, while foreigners will have the benefit of our ancestors’ blood. Our laws favor those not in our system. Those in it are trapped and bludgeoned. Another jingoist too!
Men have done the math, and finished the calculations. They know that marriage law as currently applied, is applied with bludgeon force against them. It is only the very bravest or most foolish of young men that now marry.
How much did Justin pay you to write this anyway. Heard any good lawyer jokes lately?
By Chilao
April 18, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this
I am also on point as far as the Bible goes.
except for that little stickler point about changing the 4th Commandment seventh day worship day from the day designated when Moses came down the mountain, and the Jews still have as their worship day, and the common/prevalent Sunday, 1st day of the week on most calendars, as the worship day.
hahahahahahahah
couldn’t resist. LOL
By chuck
April 18, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this
JBM, if the truth is offensive then so be it. We can find offense in whatever doesn’t agree with our own pre-conceived ideas. There’s an old bumper sticker out there that says “God said it, I believe it, that settles it”. That’s a fallacy. What it should have said is “God said it, THAT SETTLES IT.” You see, it really doesn’t matter if we believe it or not. God isn’t going to change His mind.
BTW, JBM, I will e-mail you from home if I get a chance tonight. Last night was tax night and I was pretty wrapped up in that. I have a funeral to go to this afternoon so I will be late getting home.
By Tom
April 18, 2006 10:10 AM | Link to this
The topic of divorce really should begin with the topic of marriage. Marriage has been hurt by “no-fault” divorce. No-fault divorce basically nullifies marriage. Instead of making it easier to get divorced it should be made a little more difficult to get married, i.e. counseling beforehand, setting a time period from the license application to the time you can actually get married, and other possibilities.
Diane Glass shows her contempt for traditional values by mocking Christians taking a stand against immoral behavior with her statement about us being “pig headed in our opposition to gay marriage”. Also, marriage has nothing to do with whether you live in an agrarian society or an industrial one. Do you really think God designed marriage only for farmers???
If we are going to continue with no-fault divorce then we must change the wedding vows. As far as I know the words “til death do us part” are still used. If this is something we mean then divorcing someone means you lied at the beginning and your intentions were really as long as I want to be with you. This is the perfect out for someone who doesn’t really want to stay committed when things aren’t going their way. It is one the most selfish acts a person can do. I know this because I have been through this type of divorce and my ex-wife stated to me that she “wasn’t motivated to work on our relationship” even though I was. She was thinking only of herself instead of anyone else, including our two children. By the way, I have seen various effects of our divorce with our kids that are not great and I know that more than anything in this world they wish we could be together.
Our society has preached the message that you don’t have to be accountable, take responsibility, or suffer any consequences for your actions. What a load of garbage!
Ms. Glass, it is unfortunate that you took the typical road of liberal argument and started with name calling and derogatory statements. I must admit you are right on one count: Religion has not done much to stem the tide. However to say it is the disease is a gross overstatement! And to say that laws must adapt to a changing society tells me you want a society with no foundation to set it’s rules upon! Any society must have a foundation for all it’s laws and that includes some traditions that others may not like.
In closing on this topic I would like to say that my parents marriage was not what I would call a great marriage, maybe not even a good one. However, what I got from it was the lessons of committment, and finding a way to make it work. While my mother may not have been as happy as she would like with the marriage she had she found a way to live with my father and accept him as he is. They were together for 45 years until she died. They have pretty well-adjusted kids for the most part and I am grateful for the lesson of sticking with someone no matter what. Remember the vows: in sickness and in health, for richer or poorer, in good times and bad. No-fault divorce makes all that a sham.
By Julia
April 18, 2006 10:10 AM | Link to this
If I have a dirty bathroom, a 5-year-old son who wants me to play Candyland with him, and a 2-year-old son who wants me to hold him, guess what I am going to pick? The bathroom can wait!
Monica-AMEN to that one!
By Jack
April 18, 2006 10:11 AM | Link to this
Gonna wait up for that e-mail JBM?
By The72John
April 18, 2006 10:15 AM | Link to this
Many of the people on this blog are so caught up in their sin that all they know how to do is attack
That is one of the reasons mainsream America votes Republican. They don’t hear any solutions from the left, only ad hominem attacks. When you can’t win the argument on merit, try to win it by smear tactics. That’s what goes on here and you should really try to understand that
Your self-righteousness and arrogance increases with every post, Chuck. We are so caught up in our sin? You have no right whatsoever to criticize us for anything. You, despite what you think, are not God.
Let’s be honest about yesterday’s discussion, at least as honest as someone as bound up in willful ignorance and dogma as you are can be.
No one else on this blog considers medical funding to be an either-or proposition. It is a logical fallacy to suggest that the amount of funding for one illness is in any way related to the funding of another. Your suggestion that WE politicized the debate is laughable, as YOU were the ONLY person involved who in any way tried to make it seem as if AIDS funding has political motivation.
You BEGAN your diatribe with snide insinuations about AIDS and dismissed it as being merely caused by “behavior”, and then have the gall to act affronted when other people call you on it.
It is even more laughable that you suggest that it is the liberal side of the fence indulging in ad hominem attacks. The substance of every major Conservative demagogue on the airwaves is nothing BUT ad hominem, strawman, horse-laugh, and various other fallacies. You and your kind have turned derision and inuendo into an art form.
Your attempt to play the superior intellect and wounded victim is pitiful, and anyone who has read this blog for more than a week knows it. You know it. I know it. And rest assured, Chuck, Julia knows it, too.
By RF
April 18, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this
When you can’t win the argument on merit, try to win it by smear tactics. That’s what goes on here and you should really try to understand that.
chuck- I’ll give you the fact that John jumps all in your stuff every day here, but I think his attitude hardly applies to the rest. You give it as good as you get it from all the rest of us. We argue, debate, resort to name-calling, and then come back the next day for more, and noone is more or less guilty, dude. If it’s ‘smear tactics’, then we’ve all done it, and you can’t fairly judge the entire group by that standard, much as you would like to.
One thing to remember- Julia has, in her own way, done more to make the gospel something we want to know more about. She doesn’t ‘fluff’ it, but she tells the truth without offending. It’s a refreshing approach, and reminds me that God is the God of LOVE as well as conviction. I appreciate her for that. She tells the truth about God, but she tells it as a human being, from down here among us humans, not in judgment from up on the baptist pedestal.
By Brian Curtis
April 18, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this
Just because you’re offensive and unpopular doesn’t mean you’re speaking the truth, Chuck. The truth is often offensive… but so are lies and hypocrisy.
By The72John
April 18, 2006 10:21 AM | Link to this
You see, it really doesn’t matter if we believe it or not. God isn’t going to change His mind
Some guy in the third century wrote down that God said it and it was then filtered through centuries of revisions, schisms, cullings, re-writings, re-interpretations, heresies, translations, etc.
Sigh. Why do you fundies need such a simplisitic, juvenile god to worship? Possibly because your minds can’t comprehend anything that isn’t in black and white?
By Jack
April 18, 2006 10:23 AM | Link to this
Good post Tom. People need to take the vows seriously.
By Mara
April 18, 2006 10:24 AM | Link to this
Archie, I’m sure there are “some ladies somewhere” that are like this, but I don’t know any so I can’t say why they’d be that way. I found it interesting that in describing the chores your friend did, you ended up sounding aggreived that he actually had to do these things. It sort of made me chuckle. “He washed the cars? BOTH of them?! And cleaned the bathroom? How horrible! And he had to cook, too?! Gasp! A saint! The guy is a saint!!” Y’know, even if he did this every day, that’s still only three chores, washing the cars, cooking, and cleaning the bathroom. What’s so awful about it? And a question…when you say that some women “struggle” with housework, what do you mean? Do you mean they don’t know how to clean, that they don’t have time to clean, or they just don’t want to clean?
And a couple other questions to the forum - what do you men consider “nagging”?
What is meant by the phrase “falling out everywhere” regarding low cut tops? I mean, I’ve heard this phrase attached to women who were in no way likely to physically “fall out everywhere” so I was just wondering what you meant by this…
By Archie
April 18, 2006 10:26 AM | Link to this
“Archie, are there kids involved in the marriages you describe? If I have a dirty bathroom, a 5-year-old son who wants me to play Candyland with him, and a 2-year-old son who wants me to hold him, guess what I am going to pick? The bathroom can wait!”
Monica,thanks for responding but yes there are kids involved. Monica you can play with your children for a short while and get your work done. Remember I talking about this equality,sharing,etc. that everyone is talking about. I am trying to see how many excuses will be made for the women even when they have a spouse that does housework and yardwork. I have said before that a part of being equal involves accepting criticism and it seems as if some of today’s women can’t handle that part. It seems that some,some,some have an excuse regardless of the situation in relationships. I mean if they(women) sleep with a married guy well he’s the one who did his wife wrong. If both male and female work well he can do the housework and yardwork because she’s tired. I applauded JBM’s honesty when she said women will more likely sleep with a friend’s spouse than the men she knew. We already know some men will be slack in housework and we know some men will cheat but when will we address slackness and cheating by women? Any response is fine. Any response.
By The72John
April 18, 2006 10:27 AM | Link to this
RF, Chuck views you as sub-human, too. Arguing civily with him is like a jew being nice to the SS.
By oscar
April 18, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this
No-fault divorce should be allowed if the agreement to divorce is consented to by both sides. However, if one person abandons the family, they should not receive 50% of the assets. This happened to me. My ex-wife would not join my son and I at a new work site. She still got half of everything wven though she abondoned my son and me.
By Julia
April 18, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this
Chuck-My goodness, where do I start? First of all, I don’t believe in a “namby pamby” gospel either. I’m very sorry if you thought I was critisizing you. I was trying to offer a fellow Christian some advice. You are certainly free to be a witness in your own way just as I am free to be a witness in MY own way.
And by the way, it was the holy spirit leading me to draw people in with loving kindness and a message of Christ’s love and acceptance. Christ’s message is the same. But until a person meets Christ and gives his life to Him he is not going to change. It is Christ who frees you from the yoke of sin. It is Christ who convicts people of sin-not you or I.
I understand what you are trying to say. I’m sorry if you think less of me as a Christian. I’m trying to show people the love of Christ in order for them to want to meet Him for themselves.
I didn’t mean to be harsh and for that I am sorry.
By Justin
April 18, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this
THE NO-BLAME GAME: WHY NO-FAULT DIVORCE IS OUR MOST DANGEROUS SOCIAL EXPERIMENT www.stephenbaskerville.net/noblamegame.htm
Three Judicial Biases About Moms, Dads and Children www.warrenfarrell.com/articles.php?id=7
Divorce as Revolution www.fatherhoodcoalition.org/cpf/newreadings/2003/DivorceasRevolution_SBsum03.htm
By Mara
April 18, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this
Tom - Do you really think God designed marriage only for farmers???
Um, I don’t think “god” designed marriage at all. It’s a social construct, Tom. Originally designed to codify property ownership, like chattel. You do know what “chattel” is, don’t you Tom?
By chuck
April 18, 2006 10:39 AM | Link to this
72skidoo, don’t flatter yourself. I in NO WAY consider myself to be a VICTIM. I could not care less what you have to say about me. I rather enjoy it, in fact. As I said last week, it lets me know I am saying exactly what I should be saying. If you deny that AIDS funding is primarily disproportionate because of politics, your head is even further you know where than I thought. You are probably the only person in the world who doesn’t understand the politics behind AIDS funding.
RF, what you say does have merit for SOME people on this blog. Everyone has their own slant on things and all of us have occasionally resorted to the smear. You have to admit though that there are many on this blog who contribute NOTHING to understanding. They have a chip on their shoulders and have to have somebody to blame for their poor, miserable little lives. Even Dr. Phil sometimes says “GET OVER IT”
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this
The truth can be offensive, but it won’t be received. It’s like the difference between telling your wife her chicken sucks and telling her that it could use a little salt. Either comment might make her uncomfortable for a moment, but one will cause her to shut down or lash out, and the other will likely cause her to add a little salt the next time she makes chicken.
I believe Solomon when he said that it’s harder to win a person who has been offended than it is to win an entire city. Once you offend someone, especially someone who isn’t a friend, you sever ties with that person. It’s rare that they’ll ever respect you or your beliefs; they’ll probably never hear what you’re saying, even if you’re saying the right thing. Just like you take care to shape your message to your children, you must do the same with people who don’t share your beliefs. You don’t want your kids to shut down on you and become belligerent or rebellious, but at the same time, you have to correct them and teach them, even when they don’t want to hear it.
You can tell the truth, and it may hurt, but the truth in love takes the sting away.
Every once in a while, you’ll say something along the lines of “maybe my message is a bit harsh, but…” or “maybe I could’ve said it differently, but…” and you never change your delivery. All you really have to do is ask yourself: is it working? Is anyone coming any closer to Christ because of something you said? Is anyone’s heart p******? Does anyone have a desire to get to know the Christ that you [claim to] know? I’m not asking you those questions, but you should ask yourself. Don’t let stubbornness ruin your potential. There are scores of people here and elsewhere that need to hear what you have to say, but the moment you start bashing (or whatever you call it), they put their hands over their ears and don’t hear another word you say.
You can only justify it for so long. The time will come when you’ll realize that you’ve pushed so many people away, and that their blood is on your hands. You had opportunity after opportunity to share the love of Christ with them, and instead relished in the opportunity to be hateful, causing them to reject Christ and never look back. Sure, they’re responsible for their own souls, but who’s accountable? You are.
There used to be a time when I would drink with my non-church going friends. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with drinking (not in excess), but some of them felt that “christians” shouldn’t drink and if they do, they’re hypocrites. I would repeatedly try to show them why it’s not a sin to drink, and I often felt like they were looking for an excuse to stay away from Christ and the church. When I was ordained, it became even worse: I wasn’t just a church-goer who drinks, I was a drinkin’ preacher! One night, I sat up in bed in the middle of the night and realized (so to speak) that if they’re looking for an excuse, I’m giving it to them. I don’t believe for one minute that drinking is wrong. But, my drinking was serving as a stumblingblock to them. It was giving them a hand-wrapped, convenient excuse to justify their disdain for all things christian.
For them, I had to change my delivery. I couldn’t minister to them, and drink with them. It didn’t compromise my belief or my faith. It didn’t make me any less or greater of a person. It didn’t change my life or my habits. It just removed a hindrance from my ability to witness. I took away what offended my friends, so that I wouldn’t further delay their long, slow walk to Christ.
You cannot witness effectively to those you offend. You simply cannot. And, if you continue to witness under the belief that it’s okay to offend others with the truth, then you’ll never win any souls for Christ because your witness won’t be effective. Well, at least you can lay down at night and smile knowing that, “I sure told them! Boy, did I let them have it! I told them the truth till they bled from their eyes!!” Then, you can wake up in the morning and go to church, while they sleep in. Yeah, you’re really doing a great work for the body.
I look forward to your e-mail. I, too, was tied up with taxes last night.
By RF
April 18, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this
Renee- where’s the dang tiara today?? Julia definitely gets it for her 10:32!!!
Julia- keep witnessing your way. It’s powerful in its simplicity and patience.
By Archie
April 18, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this
“Do you mean they don’t know how to clean, that they don’t have time to clean, or they just don’t want to clean”
Thanks Mara for this question. I mean they just don’t want to clean. Mara there are more than one man that’s complained that he has worked all day while she was off that day but the woman didn’t have any dinner ready. From personal experience when I am off I make sure I have a dinner plan for the family,i.e. going out or me cooking. Once again everyone needs to eat so why not cook if you’re off and he’s working or at least have a plan for dinner. Mara,you probably don’t listen to Michael Baisden so you have not heard the male complaints when the topic is opened up for men. My point is we hear so much from one side in the male-female relationship topic that it’s no wonder in this day and age the divorce rate is up.
By Julia
April 18, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this
Thank you RF! (You’re the best!)
I really appreciate what you said on my behalf.
By The72John
April 18, 2006 10:49 AM | Link to this
If you deny that AIDS funding is primarily disproportionate because of politics, your head is even further you know where than I thought. You are probably the only person in the world who doesn’t understand the politics behind AIDS funding
Of course, Chuck. Since YOU say it, it MUST be true.
Forget the fact that every major medical association and health organization world-wide cites AIDS as the single greatest crisis that we currently face. It’s all because of the GAYS.
Gee, I wish I had known earlier that we had such a POWERFUL lobby. We wouldn’t be worried about emotionaly crippled bigots like you trying to take our rights away.
it lets me know I am saying exactly what I should be saying
The rallying cry of the blind and deaf fundamentalist. If my message is offensive then it must be right. Now, I KNOW that these Hitler and Nazi references are inflamatory, and that you probably storm around after I make them, but the NAZI’s message was offensive to many people as well…does that make THEM right, too?
Sorry, but this statement of yours is a defense mechanism for your the feeble foundation upon which your fundamentalism rests. You simply filter out any objections to your message and regard it all as confirmation of your beliefs.
You are a pitiful excuse for a thinker, Chuckie.
By GOB
April 18, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this
My ex-wife would not join my son and I at a new work site. She still got half of everything wven though she abondoned my son and me.
If you left to go to a new work site, how exactly did she abandon you?
By lozen
April 18, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this
72john, your 10:21 was so good! Have you read, Misquoting Jesus? Very dry and scholarly but such a great explanation of what happened with the many groups that disagreed about who and what jesus was during the first, second and third centuries and the books they wrote and rewrote, changed and changed again to promote their particular beliefs and show that the other groups were all wrong! There was the group who believed jesus was an ordinary man who was imbued with the Christ spirit when he was baptized. There was the group that believed there were two separate beings, the man and the spirit. There was a group that believed he was god/man/son. We know which group won the battle of wits and went on to define who and what jesus was, which writings out of hundreds should be included in the bible, and establishment of orthodox christianity and the catholic hierarchy.
Chuck’s god is nothing but a projection of chuck and his vengeful, judgmental, holier-than-thou personality!
By Mara
April 18, 2006 10:53 AM | Link to this
Archie, what makes you say that women can’t accept criticism? Do you mean that they don’t agree with the criticism, thus won’t accept it? Or do you mean that they don’t change their ways of doing things after they’ve been criticized? My husband and I had an issue where I used to ask him to do something and then stand around telling him how to do it. He finally looked at me one day and said “Honey, you can ask me to do a chore or you can tell me how to do it. You don’t get to do both.” He felt that I didn’t trust him to do the job even though I thought I was just being helpful. So you see, criticism to one is merely helpful advice to another, which is why I’m asking about the situation…
on Cheating - Statistically, men are more likely to cheat than women. That doesn’t mean women don’t cheat, merely that they are less likely to. IMO there is no excuse for it, whether it’s done by a man or a woman, so you ain’t gettin’ one from me!
By Justin
April 18, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this
Oscar, and the courts allow it to happen…She walked away and she should’ve gotten zilch! And, if she changes her mind about not taking your son, the courts will allow her to come back, take your son, and get 17-23% of your “gross” income.
Mara, I consider nagging when a woman or man constantly stays on one subject, constantly trying to change your mind to get “their” way. Nagging doesn’t compromise. They follow you around until you just say “enough already, do what you want”.
Archie, I know plenty of women who are not neat. Maintaining a home before I married, I did the cooking, housework, and the yard work. Women cheating is at an all time high also. I know plenty of men whose wives left them to run off with their personal trainer.
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this
RF, Julia… how come you guys can say it in like 3 sentences and it takes me 3 pages!!!! LOL!
Sorry for 3-pager, everyone… I guess I got carried away. I really get carried away when it comes to this subject… or “heated” as some call it.
By chuck
April 18, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this
Okay JBM, tell me how you can say that homosexuality is a sin and not offend homosexuals.
By Justin
April 18, 2006 11:06 AM | Link to this
Mara, This is part of what men call nagging…
My husband and I had an issue where I used to ask him to do something and then stand around telling him how to do it.
By Anh
April 18, 2006 11:06 AM | Link to this
Divorce is up because people and society as a whole became selfish and self center. Marriage is for live. People are coming into marriage thinking it something fun to do. If the person is religious, they should be excommunicate for divorces and not allow to worship because they are sinner. Family benefit and rights should not to given to anyone who are not legally married. Divorse should never be easy, and no fault divorce make marriage a joke. Whatever the underlying reason why couple divorces, there should be shame and public stigma to the act. The failure of society the shame and humiliated compliance is a sign of social corruption.
Or if we want to make marriage a thing of the past then we should stop rewarding marriage and family. If they want kids they should put down a deposit for k-12 years of expense on society or we can house all children in special barrack for social education away for the corrupts adult.
By Tim
April 18, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this
well my partners personal trainer is nice looking… I’d probably run away with him
By GOB
April 18, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this
I consider nagging when a woman or man constantly stays on one subject, constantly trying to change your mind to get “their” way. Nagging doesn’t compromise. They follow you around until you just say “enough already, do what you want”.
Justin - You are aware that this describes you on this blog to a tee, right? I mean, I dont think I could have come up with a better description.
By The72John
April 18, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this
Chuck’s god is nothing but a projection of chuck and his vengeful, judgmental, holier-than-thou personality!
Very true. Chuck has encased himself in an unassailable mesh of denial and condemnation. Any criticism levied against him he takes as confirmation of the correctness of his actions. Any anger directed towards him he views as the problem of the person who is angry, rather than as a result of his own spiteful, vicious personality.
By Jack
April 18, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this
Julia. Don’t dare apologize to Chuck for anything. You put out the Christian message much better than he.
Mara. Nagging is when the wifer is trying to get the procrastinating husband to do something he wants to put off and since she can’t beat his a$$, she repeats her request over and over again. Works pretty good too. :)
By GOB
April 18, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this
Chuck - Have you ever read “Between Noon and Three”? It is probably the most insightful book on how much our actions and “sins” really matter in the god’s grand scheme of things.
By Justin
April 18, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this
Archie, They don’t listen to Michael Baisden or they would understand why some men are fed up. Women want it all, but don’t understand they can’t have it all. They have to compromise in some way. But no, men are the ones who should compromise according to them.
By Renee
April 18, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this
Chuck, you could say, you believe homosexuality is a sin. What you have to realize, Chuck, is your beliefs are just that….YOUR BELIEFS. Christianity and/or spirituality is very faith based, which does not make it a reality. While your faith may be strong enough to make it reality for you, all do not share that faith and/or reality. The Bible doesn’t make it so, the preacher doesn’t make it so, but if it is as such in your faith, your reality, then all power to you. The offense comes when you begin stating your reality as fact to others who do not share your beliefs.
By GOB
April 18, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this
If the person is religious, they should be excommunicate for divorces and not allow to worship because they are sinner.
Christian love makes me feel warm all over.
By Justin
April 18, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this
GOB, in that case it could describe many of you on this blog.
By Renee
April 18, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this
RF - JBM had the tiara last. I’m sure she’ll give it up though.
By lozen
April 18, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this
Archie I think a woman who won’t clean the house needs to be stoned! What could be more important than a clean house? Maybe we should return to biblical times when a woman caught in adultery was stoned. Oh, but so was the man. I guess that would take care of Campbell, Brooks and so many, many more. What amazes me is how many couples will not hire someone to clean the house even though they have two incomes and enough money to do so, because they are so stuck in thinking it’s the woman’s job to clean the house! Sure there are women who don’t clean or don’t clean enough to keep the house that three, four or five people are messing up. Your point seems to be that there are women who aren’t perfect, just as there are men who aren’t perfect. There are women who don’t take responsibility just as there are men who don’t. What do you want us to do about it?
By Justin
April 18, 2006 11:19 AM | Link to this
Jack, sometimes some men just tune them out. See, many women think when they marry a man, they become his parent not his partner.
Just watch some of the shows such as wife swap and your new mommy. The women are mainly the ones who are eccentric and different. Most men are happy with themselves. Women want to change them. Women look at a man and think, “He has potential and I can mold him into what I want”.
By Mara
April 18, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this
Archie, I have to admit that I’ve never even heard of this guy, Michael Baisden, let alone listen to him.
Here’s my thoughts on your questions. Some people are lazy. Whether they’re men or women, some people are just lazy. To be honest, I’m sort of struggling with this. Since I don’t personally know anyone who acts like your examples, it’s hard to say what’s going on. I can understand why one might be upset that the house wasn’t straight when someone was there all day, but I’m just not getting this preoccupation with having dinner ready. Some days I just don’t feel like cooking, even if I’ve been home all day. My husband knows how to cook and he can definitly peanut butter bread with the best of them, so what’s the big deal? Even on the days when one of us is off, neither of us are obligated to cook dinner. Of course, we don’t have children or regular dinner times either, so that might be a factor…
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this
That’s an easy one. In general, people are not offended when you express your beliefs, assuming those beliefs are not racially or socio-economically biased. (Racial and economic issues tend to stir emotions in people in a different kind of way).
It is not offensive (to me, or any of my homosexual friends) to hear a “christian” say I believe the Bible makes it clear that homosexuality is a sin. Why on earth would we flip out over what they believe the Bible says? Some folks don’t even believe in the Bible, so saying homosexuality is a sin based on the Bible is like saying lying is wrong according to the gospel of Bill Clinton chapter 4, verse 18! Those homosexuals who do believe in the Bible, but don’t believe homosexuality is sinful, aren’t offended by the popular, quite common interpretation that homosexuality is a sin. We know that most of you think that way, so it doesn’t bother us one bit. Sure, we may get passionate (or heated) when engaging in discussion about the subject, but it doesn’t mean we’re offended.
On the flip side, on this blog, you never
NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER, NEVER, NOPE NEVER, EVER
address the subject with “truth” in love. You point fingers and make flip remarks like, “you don’t have to believe it, God said it and that’s all that matters so you’re going to burn in hell anyway.”
You can still preach the same message, but with a different style. You can say, “I love you regardless of who you sleep with, I just don’t believe that homosexuality is right in the eyes of God.” Or, you can say, “I understand what you believe, but I believe that homosexuality is sinful.”
Renee and RF might debate with you. NetB might tell you why he disagrees. John might tell you off. But, no one is offended. We’ve just heard your opinion, and countered it with ours. For all you know, there may be a homosexual child who was raised in a church that taught against homosexuality. He might hear your loving words and be convicted. He might be led to search the scriptures or get on his knees and turn from his “wicked” ways.
But, that same boy who hears the venom you spew now will only fold his arms with frustration, having heard those same hateful words all his life.
I spent the last five years in churches that preach against homosexuality. Believe me, hateful preaching does NOT turn a homosexual straight. If you won’t take it from a non-christian, take it from me. I’ve been there. I’ve been on both sides of the issue. I know. I live it. I know that there is no preaching in the world that is going to “turn me around” or scare me straight. If you really believe my lifestyle is wrong, the best thing you can do for me is (1) pray for me, and (2) love me just the way I am. Leave the “changing” to Christ. That’s his job, not yours.
I mean, you and I are clearly two very different people, and I’m not trying to change you (although I think you could benefit from some changes - and you probably think the same of me). If you are satisfied with hurting, not helping, people, then carry on.
By The72John
April 18, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this
Just watch some of the shows such as wife swap and your new mommy. The women are mainly the ones who are eccentric and different. Most men are happy with themselves. Women want to change them. Women look at a man and think, “He has potential and I can mold him into what I want”
You can’t base your perception of people on a group of individuals selected by TV executives to put on a good show. There are plenty of eccentric, bizarre husbands out there and perfectly stable and down-to-earth wives.
Sorry that you had such a bad experience with women, but you’ve let it color everything. You say “See, many women think when they marry a man, they become his parent not his partner”, but someone could easily also say “See, many men think when they marry a man, they become her owner”.
Gender stereotypes are as innacurate as any other kind of stereotype.
By Mara
April 18, 2006 11:26 AM | Link to this
See, jack. That’s what I’d consider nagging. Repetitive and unrelenting. How Justin equates helpful advice with nagging is beyond my understanding, but I did ask for opinion. I shouldn’t expect to agree with it. :^)
By GOB
April 18, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this
No doubt, Justin, but you are the one complaining about nagging, and its negative impacts…plus the description just fit so perfectly.
By Whiley
April 18, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this
Are Justin & Zack the same person? Or they’re related? Maybe they are neighbors & both their wives left them so they have each other to vent to?
lol Justin I don’t think women are going to be a problem for you ever again. (of course it’s THEM not YOU)
By Jack
April 18, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this
“wifer” Gee, I thought I could spel.
Justin. Women marry men hoping they will change, men marry women hoping they won’t change. I never watch either of those shows, can’t do it. Nanny 911 either.
By Archie
April 18, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this
Mara I mean some women don’t change their ways after they’ve been criticized. For example as I was trying to help a young lady play billiards she took the opposite shot of the one I told her to take,even though she obviously didn’t know what she was doing.The young lady kind of sighed because things didn’t work out. Heck if she had taken the shot I told her she would have been in better position for the next shot. I also mean Mara,some women don’t like it when a man not their boss tells them something,well,as men we get criticized and rightfully so. People get on certain bloggers for being harsh but sometimes that’s the way things need to said and it seems that some women can’t deal with that. The women may agree with the criticism but don’t like the delivery and reject it but some things can’t be sugarcoated. Also I would have felt like your husband depending,depending on what the chore was. I used to get criticized when I did laundry but I took the criticism and improved quickly. My spouse complained about the cleanliness of the carport but she did nothing to help and I very quickly pointed out that fact. As for the cheating I had the situation with the Pastor who had affairs with two married women that lasted over 10 years on my mind. I did see a few female posts criticizing the women but I also saw plenty of excuses.
JBM good job on explaining the drinking situation,because that is exactly how a minister explained it to me years ago. I do understand what you were trying to say weeks ago about Bishop Long and his protests against homosexuality. I am around people like that all the time and they really think they’re not harming anyone and they have no intention of physical violence. I don’t agree with their protests against one particular sin(thing— if that makes everybody feel better) but I can’t control them.
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this
I guess I can pass the tiara on… Julia is certainly deserving.
You’re a queen, indeed, Jules!
By RF
April 18, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this
RF, Julia… how come you guys can say it in like 3 sentences and it takes me 3 pages!!!!
Geez, you’re a minister—I thought it was required of you guys!! Keep talking just long enough so the line will be shorter at Shoney’s!! LOLOL
Execellent 11:22 by the way! People have a hard time understanding that if we debate them, we’re not arguing. Some folks don’t like to be debated with, do they?? My dad’s that way, and my mom calls him pigheaded, but I wouldn’t presume to apply that to anyone here!! ;-)
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this
Oh no!!!! Everybody act like you’re asleep. Quick!!!
By The72John
April 18, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this
lol Justin I don’t think women are going to be a problem for you ever again. (of course it’s THEM not YOU)
Uh…it IS possible for women to be at fault sometimes. It’s not ALWAYS the man’s fault.
By Chilao
April 18, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this
Can we oogle the woman in the next pew over? (while pretending to be asleep) LOL
By Chilao
April 18, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this
lol Justin I don’t think women are going to be a problem for you ever again. (of course it’s THEM not YOU)
I think she implied Justin may have a difficult time getting that second or third date.
By RF
April 18, 2006 11:43 AM | Link to this
ZZZZZZzzzzzz, snort snort, ZZZZZZzzzzzzzz. I could do this for real this time of day!
By Archie
April 18, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this
“What amazes me is how many couples will not hire someone to clean the house even though they have two incomes and enough money to do so, because they are so stuck in thinking it’s the woman’s job to clean the house!”
Lozen you’re obviously older than I am because that is not the thinking of today. Not one time did I imply it was only,only the woman’s job,I merely delivered a criticism. Most of the men of today, that is guys under 50, do housework. All I am asking for is commentary and a bit of acknowledgement. You have provided both. It would be nice if women would pay attention to the complaints of the men of today and not just focus on one side of the relationship issue.
By Renee
April 18, 2006 11:45 AM | Link to this
Nagging can take several forms, including Justin’s, IMO.
JBM - excellent posts! Your 11:34 is tooo funny!
By RF
April 18, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this
Pssst, Chilao— you do that during the salvation prayer time, dude.
By chuck
April 18, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this
So Renee, as a history teacher should I say that I believe the Civil War was fought between 1861 and 1865? It is either the truth or it isn’t. The Bible either teaches it or it doesn’t. There are some areas where scripture does not come out flatly and say that something is a sin…for instance, as JBM brought up earlier, drinking. There does not appear to be a flat out prohibition of it, but there are many, many warnings about it. I can’t FLATLY come out and say that drinking alcohol is a sin. I could say that I believe that drinking alcohol is problematic for a believer and then list the reasons.
When it comes to homosexuality, there is no such ambiguity. The Bible teaches that it is a sin. Period. There is no reason in my mind, to qualify that with an “I believe” statement. Just as no one is required to believe that the sky is blue, no one has to believe that homosexuality is a sin. It doesn’t change the fact. To me qualifying that would be compromising with sin which I am not going to do. It makes it sound as if there is room for error on the subject when clearly according to the Bible, there is not. Why would that be a problem for someone who does not believe the Bible? All they have to do is dismiss it and go on with their lives. BUT, they don’t do that. Rather, they challenge it. Who is it they are trying to convince? If you don’t “believe it”, why sweat it?
My belief is that people who are gay know deep down inside that it is wrong. Very few of us like to have our faults pointed out to us…including myself. We do try to justify what we are doing. We look for acceptance.
There is an analogy in the Bible from Matthew chapter 9. Some men brought their friend to Jesus to be healed. He was paralyzed. Jesus told him to get up and go home, that his sins were forgiven. The religious elite considered this to be blasphemy. Jesus said:
4Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said, “Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts? 5Which is easier: to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up and walk’? 6But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins….” Then he said to the paralytic, “Get up, take your mat and go home.” 7And the man got up and went home. 8When the crowd saw this, they were filled with awe; and they praised God, who had given such authority to men.
In other words, Jesus could have used other words that would not have offended the religious elite, but He was trying to make a point. He had authority that came from God, because He was God.
I am decidedly NOT GOD, but I don’t have to be to read and understand the Bible or to teach others what it says. I contend that there is NOTHING I could say, and NO WAY that I could say homosexuality is a sin without offending homosexuals. Why not then just be plain and open and honest about it?
By Renee
April 18, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this
RF - The zzzzzzz’s or the snort???? LOL, never mind.
By Renee
April 18, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this
No, Chuck, as a teacher you can state a fact as to the dates of the Civil War. That would not be a belief. Just because you believe the Bible to be gospel does not make it so.
By Tim
April 18, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this
My belief is that people who are gay know deep down inside that it is wrong
nice to know that Chuck knows what a gay man feels deep down inside
oh and FYI… the Bible is just as “fuzzy” on homosexuality as it is on drinking… just because a lil NIV Bible says that it’s a sin doesn’t make it so… research in the original text… no one can find ANYWHERE in the Bible where it flat out says that homosexuality is a sin
By Julia
April 18, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this
JBM-thanks a million! (Never wore a tiara before.)
If didn’t have so much work on my desk I’d probably write a 3 pager myself today. Maybe work will slow down…
By Chilao
April 18, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this
RF - I usually keep my eyes open during group prayers, and when someone notices, I just say “Oh, I was the prayer monitor when I was a kid, I was supposed to make sure everyone else had their eyes shut during prayer, so I am used to having them open”. LOL
Sometimes they get it, Sometimes they definitely do not like it(my view).
Okay, I am over 50, but from a large family. we did not grow up with the concept of man’s work or woman’s work, it was work to be shared. So us boys were very proficient house cleaners and cooks, and our sisters were very good with mowing the lawn, tilling the garden, etc.
By RF
April 18, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this
I am decidedly NOT GOD
No offense, chuck, but I’m glad to hear that!!!!
Very few of us like to have our faults pointed out to us…including myself. We do try to justify what we are doing. We look for acceptance See John, he does admit the truth!!
Who is it they are trying to convince? If you don’t “believe it”, why sweat it?
Then why, Chuck, do the religious keep bringing it up?? What are YOU so worried about? Those who are obsessed with it aren’t the ones living it! Yesterday it was Randy who threw it in the debate, and today it’s you. So far, you guys are two for two bringing it into the conversation. But if we debate you, we’re just trying to justify our unconscious guilt. Yeah, right!! So you can say it’s wrong, but we’re not supposed to debate you. Quit bringing it up—we never argue about it when you’re not here stirring the poop!
By lozen
April 18, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this
fault, smault. Women blame men and men blame women. Men and women don’t really like each other or trust each other in general, so we create fantasies about each other. Women dream of the perfect man, and men dream of the perfect woman. (Some men dream of the perfect man; some women dream of the perfect woman.) Then you think you found them! You are sunk in romantic and lustful thoughts of the great sex that will last forever, the perfect relationship, the one who will always accept you and love you and be there to support you. It doesn’t take long to realize it’s a fantasy and then we hate each other. We get on a blog and go on and on about how awful women or how awful men are. We don’t have to do anything to actually try to improve our situation because it’s all her/his fault. We are just poor, innocent victims! We all do it. I guess I still have some gender issues and expectations to work on because it’s a lot harder for me to listen to men whine and play victim than to hear women do that!
By RF
April 18, 2006 12:01 PM | Link to this
Renee- no snorts, but I would take a few shots!! Boy, if you don’t drink before you start teaching, you will shortly after!! LOLOL
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
HAHAHAHAH, RF!!! Good one!
chuck, I was just reminded of a church in Smyrna or Marietta… I’ll have to look up the name of it. But, like many churches, they have a group that ministers to “ex-gays.” A friend of mine who was never comfortable being gay heard about the ministry and visited the church. He said after service, a guy came up to him and introduced himself, shared the love of Christ with him, and gave him his business card. He told my friend to call him if he ever wanted to talk. A couple of weeks later after they had spoken a few times, I guess the guy felt the time was right, he asked my friend if he was gay and invited him to the group.
The difference between that church and many others is their approach. They have been wildly “successful” (if you call it that) in receiving (not reforming) gay people who want to be straight. They recognize that we are bashed day in and day out, from the parking lot to the pulpit, we are mocked, beat down, ridiculed, some of us are confused, cast aside, forsaken, many were cut off from family members, etc. They recognize that the last thing the gay community needs is someone to beat them over the head with the Bible and billy-club them into salvation. They recognize that if they want to change (like my friend), they will come.
I don’t recall the statistics, but they were really impressive. I’ve worked with quite a few churches in Atlanta that have these “reform” groups, and none of them work. Not one.
Because of my position in the church community, I know hundreds, if not thousands, of gay people in Atlanta. Many of them are comfortable with who they are, and some are not. But, we all agree: the church has exacerbated their emotional state, mental health, and overall well-being with is refusal to love the “sinner” even if they hate the “sin.” Hence the increasing number of “church dropouts.” I’ve known pastors with wives, children, and boyfriends, to preach hate and hellfire to all homosexuals - under the guise of “love the sinner, hate the sin.”
Love, I remind you, is an action word. It’s not something you say, it’s something you DO. The guy my friend met loved him with his deeds. He believes that homosexuality is wrong, and he thought my friend did too. When the time was right, he approached the subject carefully and lovingly, and was able to help my friend in his walk to whatever the heck he’s doing these days! lol… seriously, it’s all in the approach.
There’s no way you can say today that you “love” John and have it mean anything at all. Nobody here would believe it.
By Archie
April 18, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this
“I guess I still have some gender issues and expectations to work on because it’s a lot harder for me to listen to men whine and play victim than to hear women do that!”
Finally Lozen you’re speaking frankly. I want you and other women to think about that statement the next time relationship issues come up.
By Jack
April 18, 2006 12:10 PM | Link to this
Chilao. You old dog. Sure that wasn’t 60 instead of 50? (Just kidding)
By Mara
April 18, 2006 12:11 PM | Link to this
Archie, if someone (of either gender) doesn’t agree with the criticizers opinion, then of course they won’t change their ways, unless the criticism is coming from their boss. To use a previous illustration, if the woman doesn’t agree with the man that the chicken needs more salt, it’s really, really doubful that she’ll start salting the chicken more. Why? Because she doesn’t agree that the criticism is valid. And if it isn’t valid, why should she change? And just because you may think that the chicken needs salt, it doesn’t follow that it actually does, if you see what I mean. Just because you offer criticism doesn’t automatically mean that you’re right.
As for the pool-playing young lady, I wonder if perhaps it WAS in your delivery. After all, you do say that “she took the opposite shot of the one I told her to take” I don’t like being told what to do either, whether its by a man or another woman. Most people don’t. Maybe that’s why there’s so much advice offered in Management Training seminars about communicating with and criticizing the underlings. I firmly believe that there is nothing that has to be said offensively. You disagree, saying “but some things can’t be sugarcoated.” There’s a huge difference in attitude between saying “Shoot this ball like this and aim it over there” and “If you want to try this ball here in that pocket there, you could try shooting in like this…” One’s an order and the other a suggestion. Which would you be more likely to accept?
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 12:13 PM | Link to this
I’m convinced that if all the chucks of the world, and their pastors, spent half as much energy combatting backstabbing, lying, fornicating, adultery, child pornography, and general lack of integrity - the world would be a much better place.
You guys can open your eyes now, I think she’s gone.
By RF
April 18, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this
They recognize that the last thing the gay community needs is someone to beat them over the head with the Bible and billy-club them into salvation
Preach on sister JBM, preach on. Can we get an AMEN?!!!
By Monica
April 18, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this
JBM, If you don’t mind my asking, what type of church are you a minister in? Just curious. Do you use any text as the basis of your beliefs?
By Netbanker
April 18, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this
Hey kids! Back from a very relaxing vacation after 4 15 hour days helping running the annual client conference. I see the topic was dropped quickly. I’ll be around later, but have over 200 email to plow through, but here’s a few thoughts and comments to keep things spinning…
I have never posted under a name other than my own and will never do so.
Shaunti’s statement that “the marriage contract is society’s foundation” really off base. The marriage contract might be A single stone in the foundation of society, but not the whole foundation simply because a marriage is focused solely on 2 individuals entering the marriage contract and all the definitions of society specifically are based on groups of individuals who are together voluntarily and share a commonality. Since the 2 are opposed (with the exception of polygamous marriages) the marriage contract can not be THE foundation.
Randy…can you give us some actual examples of this so called persecution of Christians in America? The definition of persecute is “to harass in a manner designed to injure, grieve, or afflict; specifically : to cause to suffer because of belief.” How would words in the media and the removal of private beliefs in Christ from government property cause you to suffer other than emotionally? Are Christians not causing the same emotional injury to homosexuals with their words? Is this really persecution or just hurt feelings?
Chuck…can you show me some figures for your ascertion regarding research funding for AIDS vs the other diseases you mention?
Americans will die off, while foreigners will have the benefit of our ancestors’ blood. What are you talking about? Americans ARE all foreigners unless you speak of Native Americans. The benefits of which you speak were built by former waves of immigrants starting with the Pilgrims. This is the beauty and history of our nation. What we are experiencing now with the current Hispanic Panic is the same thing that happened with the Italians and the Irish to name 2 groups that quickly come to mind.
By Chilao
April 18, 2006 12:21 PM | Link to this
Jack - and here I had so nicely left off “over 50, but not as old as Jack” (the thought crossed my mind). geeeez.
J/K!(but the thought DID cross my mind) LOL
By lozen
April 18, 2006 12:21 PM | Link to this
Just go right on chuck, fighting off your deepest desires. Why would you hone in so much on what you think the bible says about homosexuality as opposed to what it says about taking care of the poor, loving others, not judging others until you look at yourself? The answer to that question is a well known psychological fact: people hate what they have repressed in themselves. Obviously you are a man who would love to come out but you’ve repressed that all your life because you’ve been taught it’s a sin. The bible says it’s an abomination to sleep with the same sex. The bible says it’s an abomination to handle pig skin. I don’t care what the bible says but you do. Why aren’t you ranting about football as much as you do about homosexuality? I guess you haven’t repressed your desires to handle pig skins!
By Chilao
April 18, 2006 12:28 PM | Link to this
Jack - last summer I went to the movies and the ‘clerk’ or whatever they are called at the cinema, looked up at me and asked “Do you get the senior discount?”. I started laughing and said “actually 50 is my next birthday”. and had to followup with “You know you are getting older when the people who are older than you look younger than they really are”(as in “You’re 52, dang, you look my age, duh, that’s right, you ARE my age”)
and she, well I had no idea, so I completed it with “and you know you are getting older when the people who are younger than you look younger than they really are, what are you, 16 or so?”. She was about 20 actually, college student, and she laughed.
By RF
April 18, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this
Hey Net!!! Good to hear ya. The idiots have been at their usual spittle-spewing best while you were away.
How would words in the media and the removal of private beliefs in Christ from government property cause you to suffer other than emotionally? Are Christians not causing the same emotional injury to homosexuals with their words? Is this really persecution or just hurt feelings?
See JBM, that’s how you do it in less than three pages!!LOL
Julia- you might have some competition for the tiara in a little while, so don’t get too attached.
By lozen
April 18, 2006 12:36 PM | Link to this
Welcome back Net! I followed your advice and moved half my assets into international emerging markets. Thanks for the tip. As usual you bring with you clear thought and rational discussion!
Tim, hi honey. Yes, you have to wait until you’re 35 to enjoy that blender. And, of course, chuck knows how gay men feel inside ;-)
By Sylvia
April 18, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this
good point Netbanker…i hate to be called a foreigner because my famiy at least has been on this side of the globe longer then most “Americans” so please just get out of my SPHERE
By chuck
April 18, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this
Uh, Lozen and RF, the reason I brought it up was in response to another post about gays being liberal or conservative. Only one time in the HISTORY of my being on this blog have I been the FIRST to bring up the topic and that was because of Shaunti and Diane’s remarks.
As you do, I talk about whatever is being discussed. If it is appropriate to the subject being discussed, I talk about it. BTW Lozen you are about the 50th person to make the “repressed desires” comment. It wasn’t clever the first time and coming from you it’s even less so.
By Archie
April 18, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this
“As for the pool-playing young lady, I wonder if perhaps it WAS in your delivery. After all, you do say that “she took the opposite shot of the one I told her to take” I don’t like being told what to do either, whether its by a man or another woman.”
Mara the young lady didn’t get angry or frown, in fact she was a pleasant person period, but had she taken the instruction she would have been better off. I must point out that later on she did take some instruction from me. My point is you’re talking about delivery and making excuses. I would never make a demand in a bar Mara and you’re being unnecessarily intellectual or feminist with my example. My point was take the criticism and move on,don’t always try to analyze or intellectualize. You’re trying so hard to make excuses rather than just take some things constructively and move on. In my example I did not yell or demand and I must point out she was happy when she saw the results of the instruction. I am not out to bash women just point some truths that some are uncomfortable with. That’s the reason I liked JBM’s comments last week about the cheating and Lozen’s comments about her gender issues. Lunchtime…
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 12:45 PM | Link to this
Chuck, do you agree that there is no definitive evidence that God exists? Do you believe that there is no definitive evidence that the Bible is the unadulterated word from God? Do you believe that the main separator between believers and non-believers is faith: the unquestioning belief in something/someone we cannot physically see, hear, touch, taste, smell or prove the existence of?
If so, you have to understand that non-believers don’t consider it “fact” just because you said so. Even I would have a hard time - without faith - believing that “God said it and that settles it.”
Take this for an example (and try not to be offended, because that’s not my intention, I promise). I believe strongly that you are not of God, but of satan. I can build a really strong argument to show why I believe this, and why I know it’s true. However, when it comes down to making my case, it’s acceptable for me to say, “I believe…” since I’m working on convincing others to receive my message as fact.
It doesn’t make my message any less potent, it doesn’t invalidate my argument or compromise what I believe. I’m just letting others know that although I understand they don’t believe what I believe, I still maintain my argument.
You can use the same argument for homosexuals who believe they were born gay. Just because they believe it doesn’t automatically make you believe it; nor does it make it a fact. We’re not talking about science here, we’re talking about convictions.
Saying “I know you love your partner, and I know you believe you were born gay, but I believe in God and His word. And, I’m convinced that God disapproves of homosexuality. I believe it’s wrong because God said it’s wrong. God is a restorer and I know that He’ll restore you if you allow Him to” is not a compromise to what you believe. It’s the same message, packaged differently.
I believe that the only reason it’s hard for you to say it that way is that that takes love, and you’re seriously lacking in that area.
I wouldn’t be me if I didn’t close this sermon with a scripture… LOL! (Just for you RF)
Beloved, let us love one another for love is of God and everyone that loves is born of God and knows God. He that doesn’t love doesn’t know God for God is love…
Beloved, if God loves us, we also ought to love one another… No one has seen God at any time. If we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us.
God is love, and he who abides in love, abides in God, and God abides in him.
If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen? And this commandment we have from Him: that he who loves God must love his brother also.
I John 4:7-8, 11-12, 16b, 20
And, my personal favorite:
A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another.
By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.
John 13:34-35
That’s how a non-believer or believer will know whether you are truly a disciple of Christ.
(Purely a coincidence that those scriptures came from John)… hehehehe
By Jack
April 18, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this
I knew I was getting older when I went to the doctor and he was younger than me. Much younger. Didn’t trust him. (doctors are supposed to be old. LOL)
By Tim
April 18, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this
Preach on sister JBM, preach on. Can we get an AMEN?!!!
be careful… you’ll get the pentecostals speakin in tongues!!
lozen… that’s ok… I’m having too much fun livin in sin with my partner anyway lol :)
hey net!!! long time no chat… where did you go on vacation? I’m goin to Puerto Vallarta May 6th… My birthday is April 29th so the trip is my bday present
By lozen
April 18, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this
Lozen you’re obviously older than I am because that is not the thinking of today. Oh, come on Archie. The women I work with are in their 30’s, 40’s and 50’s. They take turns complaining about their husbands not helping with cleaning, childcare etc. If most men of today do housework why do all the studies that are done show that women are unhappy because they still are expected to do that and work outside the home?
By The72John
April 18, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this
Chuck doesn’t even believe that Christianity teaches love and tolerance. How can you expect him to deal with more complex issues?
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this
Yayyyyy NetB’s back!!!!!
Monica, I am a member of an Apostolic/Pentecostal church, but because of my work (and recently, other non-work issues), I rarely go to the same church for more than a year. I was licensed in the Church of God in Christ (www.cogic.org) which does not teach that homosexuality is acceptable. I was ordained in an Apostolic/Pentecostal church that also doesn’t condone homosexuality, although the pastor is gay.
I’m not sure what you mean by your second question about text, but I’ll give it a shot. Yes, I use scriptural text when I’m preaching. Yes, everything I believe (or don’t believe) is supported by scripture - although that doesn’t say too much since the Bible can be used to prove and disprove many opposing viewpoints.
By lozen
April 18, 2006 01:04 PM | Link to this
But chuck doesn’t hate homosexuals; he hates the sin! He just wants homosexuals to have less civil rights than heterosexuals; he doesn’t HATE them!
By Mara
April 18, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this
Okay Archie. You asked for opinion and I gave it. I don’t agree that explaining why a woman might disregard your criticism is in any way “making an excuse”. You wanted to know why, and I told you what I thought. Whether my opinion was valid is pretty much beside the point, but it wasn’t an “excuse”, Archie. It was an *explaination”.
But then, I actually believed you when you said you wanted to know what we women thought. Had I known that I was just supposed to “take the criticism and move on, don’t always try to analyze or intellectualize” I wouldn’t have even bothered. Silly me. When someone gives me advice or criticism I usually try to find out if that criticism is valid…shoulda known that I was just supposed to swallow it whole, without the slightest bit of analysis. Okay then. Have a nice day.
Oh, and by the way…I am an intellectual and a feminist. Which, I suppose, is why I actually think about things before I accept their validity.
By FatMoose
April 18, 2006 01:10 PM | Link to this
Heard a impressive Reverend on NPR this weekend.
When he was asked if he thought if there was a religious uprising, he replied “Yes, and these are rarely a good thing.” and continued with “That might sound odd coming from a reverend, but these religious people are out to guarantee their way into heaven. They are looking for absolutes, and Christianity should promote transcending being huan and to provide comfort in a world without absolutes.”
And when asked about homosexuality, he expressed that he is frustrated with the church since “the bible NEVER addresses a relationship bw two loving people of the same sex.”
Made me think about a few of the religious people on here that seem fixated on getting THEIR golden ticket into heaven by mastering the rules.
By Justin
April 18, 2006 01:16 PM | Link to this
The Alternatives to Marriage Project (AtMP) is a national nonprofit organization advocating for equality and fairness for unmarried people, including people who choose not to marry, cannot marry, or live together before marriage.
www.unmarried.org
By Netbanker
April 18, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this
JBM..well done!
Julia…you set a wonderful example of the LOVE of Christ and what being a christian is supposed to be about.
Randy, Zack, and Chuck…you guys should maybe take note that no one attacks Julia for her faith or christian statements because she speaks with her heart which is filled with love rather than the slash and burn techniques you guys use.
Chuck…bad example with the Civil War and the Bible. Based on the definitions of fact and faith you can NEVER, EVER support your arguments about homosexuality or anything else by using the Bible or your belief system due to the bolded part of the faith definition below. All religions are about faith so I’m not trying to single out christianity here at all.
FACT: the quality of being actual : ACTUALITY 4 a : something that has actual existence b : an actual occurrence
FAITH: belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
My belief is that people who are gay know deep down inside that it is wrong. That statement illuminates your prejudice against gays. You believe it is wrong (and it turns out that belief is a synonym for faith) therefore others must also. It is a faith-based belief.
Why aren’t you ranting about football as much as you do about homosexuality? I guess you haven’t repressed your desires to handle pig skins! Since men are pigs and gay males are men, then handling pig skins is the same desire right? He’s just handline two desires with one repression. hehehehehehe
By Jack
April 18, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this
“such a fine line…I hate to see it go.”
OK Mara. Who sang this?
By Monica
April 18, 2006 01:18 PM | Link to this
Thanks, JBM. When I asked about the text I meant the Bible. Sorry that wasn’t clear. Most churches use the Bible, but others use altenate texts (ie, the Book of Mormon) I appreciate the way that you share your views.
By Renee
April 18, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this
Smooches Net!!!
By GOB
April 18, 2006 01:26 PM | Link to this
Am I the only one noticing that Archie is slowly morphing into Justin with his comments today?
By RF
April 18, 2006 01:35 PM | Link to this
Net- GOOOOOD 1:17!! Now let’s see how it gets twisted around and everything justified because of the truth.
By Julia
April 18, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this
Monica-I forgot to say thank you this morning for your kind words. You are a really nice lady. Thanks!
JBM-I loved your posts. Your 12:45 was awesome! (LOL at the last part!!!)
Tim-My birthday is on the 23rd. Happy early birthday if I don’t get to talk to you before then.
RF-I think JBM deserves that tiara.
NetB-You are awesome! Thanks for your kind words. You are missed on here when you are away. Everyone loves you!
Chuck-I want to get back to you in a little while. I have a few more things to add to our conversation…;)
By Monica
April 18, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this
This one’s for you, Archie.
Woman 1: How is your daughter and her new husband?
Woman 2: Oh just great! He is so sweet and just wonderful to her! He cleans the bathrooms, mops the floors, washes the clothes, makes dinner, he’s just wonderful!
Woman 1: How nice! How is your son and his new wife?
Woman 2: Well, that’s a different story. She is so lazy, my poor son has to clean the bathrooms, mop the floors, wash the clothes, and even make dinner…
By Mara
April 18, 2006 01:40 PM | Link to this
C’mon Jack. At least challenge me LOL!!! That, my dear, is the great Jackson Browne :^)
By The72John
April 18, 2006 01:41 PM | Link to this
Most churches use the Bible, but others use altenate texts
Uh huh - and some use the works of Science Fiction author L. Ron Hubbard…those are the one’s you have to look out for.
By Netbanker
April 18, 2006 01:41 PM | Link to this
Hey Tim! It HAS been a long time. Happy Upcoming Birthday!! A trip to PV is a good birthday present. Are you guys going with your friends from San Diego or L.A.?
Vacation was just a trip to the condo in Hollywood, FL so no international travel or anything exciting…just a LOT of relaxing and reading. I finally finished the second book of the North and South trilogy. The closest thing we did to going out was to walk to dinner one night on the boardwalk. Otherwise we dined at home on the balcony, went to bed early, spent time at the gym and walking on the boardwalk every morning, sat around on the beach or by the pool, and caught up on sleep. Geez…I hope that description of my gay vacation lifestyle isn’t too hedonistic for Randy. I wouldn’t want to shock him or anything with activities so clearly decadent and immoral as gay eating, gay reading, gay walking, and the everso straight-to-hell-do-not-pass-the-pearly-gates sinful as gay sleeping in a gay bed with 400-threadcount gay Egyptian cotton sheets.
Thanks for the welcome back JBM. And a hearty AMEN, Sista! You’ve been doing a great job the past 2 days.
By Mara
April 18, 2006 01:42 PM | Link to this
GOB - they’re in the same chapter of the He-man Woman Haters Club…heh, heh, heh…
By Archie
April 18, 2006 01:51 PM | Link to this
I am not morphing into Justin. I have never been thru what Justin has been thru. Mara, I have no problem with intellectuals or feminists especially since I often agree with Diane and JBM and they both fit the descriptions quite well. When I mentioned analysis I was referring to the pool example that I used. Mara, you can give any,any opinion you want,I was just commenting that with the example I used it wasn’t necessary to mention my delivery. I was just playing a game of pool and I used that to make a point,albeit simple one. I picked the topic and I asked questions because I wanted to know some things and I wanted to get away from discussion of racial issues. I also wanted to see if some women could be critical of women without making excuses and surprisingly Lozen acknowledged that she may have gender issues. People have been pounding on Justin but when criticism comes their way in the slightest some can’t deal with it. I must make the statement that guys also don’t take instruction when it comes to pool sometimes. The women did respond and answer the questions but I think if we’re going to criticize Chuck,Zack,Justin,myself for not being open-minded then hey, we had better look at ourselves…
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 01:51 PM | Link to this
Monica, no problem. You’ll find that I’m a very transparent person - my life is an open book, for the most part.
For clarity, I belong to a “Bible-based” mainstream apostolic/pentecostal church. They don’t have any “new wave” teachings and pretty much think everything is a sin… lol.
By Chilao
April 18, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this
LOL @ 72John’s Hubbard remark, look over your shoulder for some lawyers coming your way.
welcome back NetB.
okay, a quote, how relevant, reading USNews and World Report:(04.17.06 issue)
Dem Rep. Barney Frank, on (Tom) DeLay’s statement that while he doesn’t like Frank’s open homosexuality, he feels commanded to love the Massachusets Democrat:
I am prepared to release him from the commandment to love me
By Justin
April 18, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this
Okay, I am going to start the jokes early…
A guy slices his ball in the woods and goes in to look for it. He meets a girl from the next fairway looking for her ball. They start to chat and have a wonderful little conversation. She suddenly says to him, ” You know… you look like my third husband. “He says, “Oh yeah?”, and then asks her how many times she’s been married. “Twice,” she replies.
Divorce Lawyer: $10,000 Loss of house, car, etc. $250,000 Small marine motor: $275 Disposable camera: $8 Sending your ex-wife a picture of you boating in her family heirloom dining room table…PRICELESS!
Q. What do you call a woman who has lost 95% of her intelligence? A. Divorced
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this
Thanks, Julia! You’re beautiful.
NetB, I was just holding it down until you got back! LOL… I was going to say I don’t know what I’d do without you and RF here, but I do know: I’d leave! LOL! You guys are darned near perfect, to me.
Monica, your 1:39 is so on point.
By GOB
April 18, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this
Archie - Justin is only being pounded on for two reasons. The first is that he continues to make huge sweeping generalizations about women. He will follow saying he doesnt mean all, but will then go and say something like “women only marry so they can get their hooks in a man’s wallet.”
The other reason is becuase he hasnt been able to talk about anything but how evil women are and how unfair the courts and child support are.
And the cut-and-paste books…THat is the third reason
By Nikita
April 18, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this
Ditto:
What’s the difference between a lawyer and a catfish? One is an ugly, scum sucking bottom-feeder and the other is a fish.
What’s the difference between God and a lawyer? God doesn’t think he’s a lawyer.
What’s the difference between a dead skunk in the road and a dead lawyer in the road? Vultures will eat the skunk.
Why should lawyers be buried 100 feet deep? Because deep down, they’re really good people.
How do you get a lawyer out of a tree? Cut the rope.
How many personal injury lawyers does it take to change a light bulb? Three — one to turn the bulb, one to shake him off the ladder, and the third to sue the ladder company.
A lawyer and an engineer were fishing in the Caribbean. The lawyer said “I’m here because my house burned down and everything I owned was destroyed by the fire. The insurance company paid for everything.” “That’s quite a coincidence”, said the engineer, “I’m here because my house and all my belongings were destroyed by a flood, and my insurance company also paid for everything.” The lawyer looked somewhat confused. “How do you start a flood?”, he asked.
A man took a trip out West after a harrowing divorce proceeding. He stopped in a bar, and after a few drinks, stated to no one in particular, “Lawyers are horses’ asses.” One of the locals spoke up on hearing this: “Mister, you’d better watch what you say. You’re in horse country.”
As Mr. Smith was on his death bed, he attempted to formulate a plan that would allow him to take at least some of his considerable wealth with him. He called for the three men he trusted most - his lawyer, his doctor, and his clergyman. He told them, “I’m going to give you each $30,000 in cash before I die. At my funeral, I want you to place the money in my coffin so that I can try to take it with me.”
All three agreed to do this and were given the money. At the funeral, each approached the coffin in turn and placed an envelope inside.
While riding in the limousine back from the cemetery, the clergyman said, “I have to confess something to you fellows. Brother Smith was a good churchman all his life, and I know he would have wanted me to do this. The church needed a new baptistery very badly, and I took $10,000 of the money he gave me and bought one. I only put $20,000 in the coffin.” The physician then said, “Well, since we’re confiding in one another, I might as well tell you that I didn’t put the full $30,000 in the coffin either. Smith had a disease that could have been diagnosed sooner if I had this very new machine, but the machine cost $20,000 and I couldn’t afford it then. I used $20,000 of the money to buy the machine so that I might be able to save another patient. I know that Smith would have wanted me to do that.” The lawyer then said, “I’m ashamed of both of you. When I put my envelope into that coffin, it held my personal check for the full $30,000.”
By Justin
April 18, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this
Archie, I wouldn’t wish what I have been through on anyone.
No Archie isn’t morphing into me and I agree with him that it is hard for some of you to take criticism.
By RF
April 18, 2006 02:12 PM | Link to this
400-threadcount gay Egyptian cotton sheets. DANG, I’m jealous. I do good to have 250 thread count!! Must be nice! But you know, those 250 count get pretty soft after you’ve washed them 500 times!!
JBM- just imagine me sitting in the pew, rocking back and forth with the big funeral home fan just a swingin’ while I say “uh-hmmmm” and “tell ‘em preacher!”
By Justin
April 18, 2006 02:13 PM | Link to this
Bachelors know more about women than married men; if they didn’t they’d be married too. H. L. Mencken
How can a woman be expected to be happy with a man who insists on treating her as if she were a perfectly normal human being. Oscar Wilde
The secret of a happy marriage remains a secret. Henry Youngman
By Mara
April 18, 2006 02:20 PM | Link to this
And what exactly were we supposed to be critical of these women for doing, Archie? For not hopping-to when criticized? For not accepting criticism without question? For not having the house clean and dinner ready when Hubby gets home from a hard day at the office, even though she was home all day long? First of all, there’s nothing wrong with taking criticism with a grain of salt. In fact, it’s probably smart to think your way through things before you accept them as valid. So I don’t see anything there to criticize, but then, I am a woman…
Second, laziness is non-gendered. If you want criticism by gender, you need to specify a gender-dependant trait. I have no more respect for a lazy woman than I do a lazy man.
By Mara
April 18, 2006 02:23 PM | Link to this
GOB - well explained ‘bout Justin. Good post.
By candide
April 18, 2006 02:31 PM | Link to this
Slap anyone who quotes the Bible at you!
By Justin
April 18, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this
GOB, not all women are evil but when the divorce attorney sees dollar signs and starts whispering in your ear, the majority of you change and go for the jugular! Do your assigned reading…
http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2006/03/28/black-marriage/
www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/JennniferRobackMorse/2006/03/27/191341.html
By GOB
April 18, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this
GOB, not all women are evil but when the divorce attorney sees dollar signs and starts whispering in your ear, the majority of you change and go for the jugular!
So women aren’t all evil, but the majority are either so greedy, or so dumb that it is that easy for a divorce lawyer to manipulate them?
I am a man, and can clearly see through the BS you continue to post. At some point in your life, you are going to have to move on, or realize that whining and complaining arent going to solve anything.
By Justin
April 18, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this
Actually many of them are greedy (not dumb), that is why the divorce lawyers can manipulate them. The women try to protect their “standard of living” or use the children stating the “children are used to a standard of living”. Aren’t the children entitled to a similar “standard of living” at the father’s home also?
I’ll move on when divorce laws become fair and the court stop allowing my ex to use the children as pawns.
By Jack
April 18, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this
What is the difference between a lawyer lying dead in the road and a skunk laying dead in the road?
There are skid marks in front of the skunk.
By Susie
April 18, 2006 02:55 PM | Link to this
I think this is nuts. There literally ARE “no-fault” divorces. I know it’s cliche, I got married way too young to know what I was getting myself into. I was too young to understand that people go through changes as they get older, and there was no way I could see that there would ever be a time when my husband and me wouldn’t be together. And we gave it 18 years, so no one can say we didn’t try to make it work! The truth is, as we grew UP, we grew apart. There wasn’t ever any really bad fighting with us, but there was always a sense of us not getting along. Denying it for years didn’t make it go away. Counseling went nowhere.
We decided to get divorced last year and have been for about 8 months now. If anything, our kids seem to have some sense of “relief,” for lack of a better word.
My ex and I get along better than we EVER have, and we still do stuff with our kids together. My friend asked me what our secret was, and I thought about it for a minute and shrugged and said, “we don’t hate each other?” And we don’t. We just couldn’t live together. Our kids are happier now than they’ve ever been, they see their dad anytime they want to. He pretty much gets them every weekend if he wants to, and he usually does.
Our divorce was a completely mutual decision. NO one was at “fault.” We sat down and wrote out everything we wanted our divorce papers to say, (including a “morality clause,”)took them to an attorney, and said “here, file it.” And that was that. We didn’t even have to go to court. (we did have to go to the parenting classes, though.)
By Jack
April 18, 2006 03:02 PM | Link to this
“I need to get back to cool, cool, rain”
This one is tougher. Who did it?
By Scalia
April 18, 2006 03:05 PM | Link to this
It’s the same old battle. I really wonder if adulterers like Bob Barr, Newt Gingrich, many other politicians, and common people on the street are bludgeoned the same way. How about the liars? And the killers? Are they constantly reminded of their sins? Do people go to the jails and constantly tell the convicted murders that they are murders and that they are going to hell? Just an interesting thought.
And Netbanker, I love the 400 count Egyptian cotton sheets. I started me thinking of a North African motif for a room with Moroccan windows and Egyptian art.
By lozen
April 18, 2006 03:05 PM | Link to this
Mara, I really appreciate you!
Okay, Justin, please tell me what you think you accomplish by continually beating us over the head with this? The people who agree with you, agree already. The people who realize we are hearing only one side of a two-sided story, still think we’ve only heard one side of the story which always has two sides. You seem to have gotten through to Archie who now is seemingly wanting to pit the women against you/he/Zack/Chuck etc.
It has been suggested that you go to a divorce support group; very good suggestion. It has been suggested that you move on; I would never tell you that because each of us moves on when we are ready. But I am getting tired of your continuing generalizations about “evil” women. Just as people get tired of generalizations about men and call us on it.
Archie: It’s beginning to seem to me that you are trying your best to pit women on this blog against other women we don’t even know. Brooks, who had an affair with Campbell, so what? Women who don’t cook and clean. Big deal. I will never criticize the actions of my sisters in general and try not to criticize other women in particular (unless they’re religious lunatics or people like that lawyer who posted such a snotty thing this morning). We have been pitted against each other far too much in the past. “Good” women hate “bad” women. Stay at home mothers are pitted against working outside the home mothers on tv. I am a feminist and my sympathies, loyalty, compassion are first of all for other women. (That doesn’t mean I have no sympathy, loyalty, compassion for men.) Women aren’t perfect and don’t have to be. We all make mistakes; we’re all human. Your posts have been making me uncomfortable but I didn’t realize exactly why until now.
By Eirik
April 18, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
The Who
By Zack
April 18, 2006 03:17 PM | Link to this
Ms. Glass,
You’re not God. I’m not God. No one else on this earth is God. WE don’t determine truth; we either adhere to it, or we don’t. WE have no jurisdiction in this department. WE don’t tell God what is sinful and what isn’t. Truth doesn’t evolve over time, just like we, as humans, do not. No, we don’t define marriage on our own. In the court system, we can pass legislation, yes, but we can’t support it with reason. We don’t leave it up to our imaginations to define what marriage is. We can tell ourselves all day long—until we’re half as in denial as you are—that gender roles do not exist and that homosexuality is a normal, natural lifestyle, but doing so changes none of the truth.
Unfortunately, many people kid themselves as you do. Many say “life” is defined any way the mother in question chooses to define it. Again, not true.
Ms. Glass, I’m sure you did well in school and on standardized tests, etc., etc.. Your intelligence level is fine, but your worldview is completely off. When you try to put man in God’s role, you’re trying to do the impossible, and the result is a bunch of absurd, manmade ideologies. I’d say you and Ms. Feldhahn are probably equally intelligent. The main reason her essays are always better is because her worldview is right.
—clausentowashington@yahoo.com
By Justin
April 18, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this
Susie, it is great the two of you came together and settled everything amicably. Kudos to you and your ex!
lozen, that is the problem with most women. You support each other even when you’re wrong. Women aren’t perfect and don’t have to be but you expect men to be perfect. My posts make you uncomfortable because you know women do have the upper hand in divorce.
By Justin
April 18, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this
At least this week I am topic…
By Chilao
April 18, 2006 03:22 PM | Link to this
I’ll move on when divorce laws become fair and the court stop allowing my ex to use the children as pawns
Justin, then I think you are going to be dwelling on this for a long long time.
By Susie
April 18, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this
Thanks for the Kudos, Justin…
Women don’t always support each other when we are wrong. Sometimes women don’t support each other when they are right. If you think you’ve been treated badly by a woman, you ain’t seen nothing! Women are usually meaner to each other than to anyone else! Just something I’ve observed (from about the 6th grade on to the present day!)
By Jack
April 18, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this
Eirik. That was for Mara. See if you can stump her. (She’s good)
By Mara
April 18, 2006 03:27 PM | Link to this
Dang, Eirik! Good job. My internal jukebox was stuck on UB40’s Red Red Wine and I couldn’t pull this one out! Ya stumped be Jack LOL!!!
Thanks, lozen. like you say, nobody is perfect but it’s nice to be appreciated :^P
By Julia
April 18, 2006 03:30 PM | Link to this
What is the Lord like?
Psalm 145:8 The LORD is gracious, and full of compassion; slow to anger, and of great mercy.
Jesus is speaking here:
Matthew 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. 29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. 30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.
For Chuck to consider: (sorry, kind of lengthy)
1 Peter 3:8 Finally, be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another, love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous: 9 Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing.
10 For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile: 11 Let him eschew evil, and do good; let him seek peace, and ensue it. 12 For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers: but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil.
13 And who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good? 14But and if ye suffer for righteousness’ sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled; 16 Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ.
17 For it is better, if the will of God be so, that ye suffer for well doing, than for evil doing.
By GOB
April 18, 2006 03:30 PM | Link to this
My posts make you uncomfortable because you know women do have the upper hand in divorce.
They make me uncomfortable because after a month, I have heard every single thing you could possibly have to say on this topic, yet every week, you post it all again. And again. And again. And again….
By Chilao
April 18, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
LMAO @ At least this week I am (on) topic
yes, you are, indeed you are.
where you discussing this when the topic was soda cans should require obesity warnings? rhetorical…LOL
was she on the fuller side? from too much Coca-Cola? LOL
By Netbanker
April 18, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this
RF…do you have any idea how hard it is to find gay Egyptian cotton since homosexuality is illegal in Egypt?! And I forgot to mention that they’re sateen so that made it even harder because those Sateens hardly ever admit they’re gay even though they love naked boys sleeping between them. Seriously though, I got those sheets at Stein Mart for $90. Granny told me to only get 2 sets of sheets and to spend the extra for good ones because they’ll be nice and soft as well as last for years and years. Stick with me and I’ll have you stylin’ and sleeping in luxury for next to nothing! (or in nothing ;) Now it’s time for a pop quiz…and this first question does stretch back a few months….where do we purchase our clothes during their end of season clearance? And where will we start buying our sheets (or telling our family to buy them when we ask for them for Christmas…which is how I got my first set)?
I have a picture of you in the church pew, but I’ve got to tell you that in my head you’ve also got on a big ol’ church lady hat with plenty of feathers and netting. I can’t help it it just goes with the image you painted.
Here are a few quotes that seem appropriate today. The first two are for Justin and the last for Mara, Kimberly, Lozen, and Whiley:
“What would men be without women? Scarce, sir..mighty scarce.” - Mark Twain
“By all means, marry. If you get a good wife, you’ll become happy; if you get” a bad one, you’ll become a philosopher. - Socrates
“The male is a domestic animal which, if treated with firmness and kindness, can be trained to do most things.” - Jilly Cooper
And before I forget, Renee…kisses to you too! Sending warm sunny thoughts your way!
By Eirik
April 18, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
Oops..hope I didn’t butt in…
How about this one Mara…
“I’ll be in my basement room, with a needle and a spoon”
By Monica
April 18, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
“Stay close to me…”
Okay Mara, now I’ve got UB40 in my head - wasn’t that such a great song!
By RF
April 18, 2006 03:45 PM | Link to this
Net- Dillard’s of course. But, since I don’t watch TV much and rarely have time to read the paper, I tend to miss the really good sales. Did I miss Dillard’s again?? I LOVE Stein Mart and like Tuesday Morning, but haven’t been in a while. Sounds like I need to go!! Do the sheets come with the boys between them?? ;-)
By Mara
April 18, 2006 03:47 PM | Link to this
Eirik, I believe that would be the Stones, man!!
Ok, my turn:
Carved my cure with the blade That left me in scars Now every time I’m weak Words scream from my arm
By God
April 18, 2006 03:48 PM | Link to this
To Zack
I am God and you displease me
Now bring me some cookies..
By Renee
April 18, 2006 03:50 PM | Link to this
I even liked that song lol.
By Mara
April 18, 2006 03:52 PM | Link to this
Too funny, Net, LOL!! It’s all in the training! LMAO!!
Yeah, Monica. I was a late-comer to UB40 music, but I made up for it in enthusiasms :^)
By Jack
April 18, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this
Mara. I admit I don’t know much of the new stuff. I am from the “78” days. LOL
By Mara
April 18, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this
Quittin’ time!!!! Wooohoooo!!! later, taters…
By Eirik
April 18, 2006 03:59 PM | Link to this
Mara,
Excellent…Sticky Fingers..(I just bought it for my ipod).
(I’m sure seeing the album cover and inset as a teenager had something to do with the way I turned out…)
I’m stumped…sounds sort of metal-ish though…Black Sabbath..Metallica…I’m really reaching..
By Tim
April 18, 2006 04:02 PM | Link to this
Julia… thanks for the early birthday wishes… right back at ya :)
Netb… sounds like my kind of vacation… the last two years we have gone to Ft. Lauderdale… and laid on the beach or by the pool all day… go to dinner… then come back and go to sleep around 10 (I know y’all are soooo jealous of the excitement in my life!!)… this year the only difference is we will be in Mexico so I’ll be laying on the beach sayin cervesa por favor… or as I shop… quanto es :)… our friends in LA aren’t going with us… they had actually looked into going before even talking to us but decided on P’town during the 4th… which is funny because we looked into that too before we decided on PV… oh and on the sheets… go to Stein Mart!!! we got 1000 thread count for $98
By Chilao
April 18, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this
Mara - Queensryche, but only thanks to google. LOL
i did not start doing metal and Metallica untl 1992, except for Black Sabbath/Deep Purple way way way back.
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 04:09 PM | Link to this
LLOL @ God wanting cookies!!! That’s hilarious! Almost made me spit my chewed up Ritz bits all over my monitor!
RF - I can SO picture you waving me on in the pews… I even see the boys fidgeting next to you, asking, “how many more pages does she have???? She keeps flipping…” LOL!
Oh snap! I used to love Stein Mart… haven’t been there in ages!
By Tony Zizza
April 18, 2006 04:10 PM | Link to this
Today must be a strange day indeed as I must admit both Shaunti and Diane make some good comments regarding no fault divorce.
There’s little doubt that the folks who benefit most from adults who can’t make a marriage work are lawyers and the mental health field. One problem I see with no fault divorce is that it usually is more the fault of one person that a marriage ends than the other. I think there needs to be more teeth to an uncontested divorce as it pertains to finances.
Then again, when a marriage ends, damage control is key no matter who is more at fault than the other.
Finally, the answer isn’t more counseling for adults and children affected by the end of a marriage or government imposed waiting periods. The true answer is for both genders to be equally more aware of who they are really getting married to. When adults exercise better judgement with who they get involved with, everyone wins.
By Chilao
April 18, 2006 04:10 PM | Link to this
oh ,that was Eirik with the Queensryche, sorry, Mara posted the lyrics. missed all that 80/s hair-band metal stuff.
i was doing ‘punk/alternative’ rock in the 80s/ the infamous KROQ/Pasadena.
By Justin
April 18, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this
Susie, that is why I will never let my kids see that movie with Lindsay Lohan…mean girls or jawbreaker…
I wish you could talk to my ex…it would be okay if she would stop emotionally damaging the children and stop being vengeful…
By Jack
April 18, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this
Tim. After your birthday, I’ll still have socks older than you. LOL
By Chilao
April 18, 2006 04:13 PM | Link to this
I walked into a SteinMart after driving by several for several years, I thought it was a hobby-store. ended up with a belt, I don’t really even wear.
By lozen
April 18, 2006 04:13 PM | Link to this
Justin, I was speaking to Archie not you when I said his posts made me uncomfortable.
By The72John
April 18, 2006 04:16 PM | Link to this
LLOL @ God wanting cookies!!! That’s hilarious! Almost made me spit my chewed up Ritz bits all over my monitor!
Well, often when people eat my Butterfinger cookies, they start talking loudly to and about God, so it only makes sense he would want some for himself.
By Tim
April 18, 2006 04:20 PM | Link to this
lol @ Jack… that may be true… and I don’t know you, but I would be willing to bet that you could still hang with the best of em!
By Just Being Me
April 18, 2006 04:26 PM | Link to this
LLOL @ God wanting cookies!!! That’s hilarious! Almost made me spit my chewed up Ritz bits all over my monitor!
RF - I can SO picture you waving me on in the pews… I even see the boys fidgeting next to you, asking, “how many more pages does she have???? She keeps flipping…” LOL!
Oh snap! I used to love Stein Mart… haven’t been there in ages!
By Whiley
April 18, 2006 04:30 PM | Link to this
Please join us & post YOUR SIDE OF THE STORY.
Who wants to bet Justin is completely full of S@#$#@ & was probably busted cheating and/or arrested for domestic abuse. How much ya want to bet his wife did everything & he was one of those “absent” fathers.
The TRUTH is more than likely NOT ANYTHING like Justin claims. I’ve doubted a lot of his story from the beginning anyway. I never believed he was “Justin”.
“Mean Girls” is a comedy, get over yourself.
By Tim
April 18, 2006 04:38 PM | Link to this
I love “Mean Girls” it’s so funny… I was planning on watching it on my portable dvd player during the flight to PV… and then after that… probably start watching The Golden Girls season 2
By Chilao
April 18, 2006 04:41 PM | Link to this
Mean Girls is a fun movie awBreaker as well, a recommended flick there, not quite q comedy but….
By Whiley
April 18, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this
lol TIM ! Funny movies are still funny even if they are geared toward the younger people. Did you know the blonde girl from Mean Girls was in The Notebook too? Wasn’t the other Mean Girl in the LOST IN SPACE remake?
By Jack
April 18, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this
Thanks Tim. I can. Happy Birthday to you!
By lozen
April 18, 2006 04:48 PM | Link to this
Why Justin, when did I ever say I expected men to be perfect? I thought I had just said, “We’re all human and we all make mistakes.”
By Randy
April 18, 2006 04:52 PM | Link to this
Got a question for Lozen, you said earlier you are reading a book about “Misquoted Jesus”. Why do you feel the need to read books about something you don’t believe??? I mean, I don’t believe in Buddism, Space Aliens nor Wicca but I don’t feel the need to try to confirm my beliefs with books that say that they aren’t real. If you really don’t believe in the Church, what’s putting pressure on you to try to stay in that belief system(non-believer)??? You see to be fighting it major.
By Chilao
April 18, 2006 04:56 PM | Link to this
sorry, s/b JAWBREAKER, got a phone call and meeting call.
By Tim
April 18, 2006 04:56 PM | Link to this
Whiley… I have not seen any of those other movies… I just think it’s great that the blonde chick could predict the weather with her boobs… what a talent!! :)
Jack… thanks!
By Archie
April 18, 2006 05:02 PM | Link to this
Mara,”I have no more respect for a lazy woman than I do a lazy man” that’s a good comment but you did intellectualize my pool example way too much. I am not pitting good woman vs bad woman either. Lozen you may be uncomfortable with some of my criticisms and really it does make my point. I wanted opinions and I got them. I do find it interesting that so many complain about housework from men but when that conversation turns to women all of sudden people are uncomfortable. Lozen you answered the questions just fine so what’s the problem? Not one man has said all women are evil but of course we know Justin has some problems but I asked questions and gave my opinion and now some are uncomfortable—interesting. I have already thanked the ladies for their responses. It is interesting that I never implied laziness was by gender. I have already given my point of reference. There are no generalities. I would like to hear even more responses on why the other woman should not feel apologetic.
By Netbanker
April 18, 2006 05:02 PM | Link to this
Good work on the quiz RF! I was soooo disappointed when the Stein Mart at North Dekalb Mall closed. I don’t even know where the closest one would be now. I’ve got to try Tuesday Morning. Heard good things about them, but just haven’t gone. I’m due for a trip to one or the other to restock the “Oh sh!t, we need a quick host/hostess or acquaintance gift and don’t have time” shelf. LOL at your question! Silly goose, the boy is the purchaser of the sheets. You have to promise to sleep naked or they won’t sell them too you and you have to sign the release form…”Naked boys not included. Manufacturer is not responsible for the quality of any boys supplied by the consumer or their agents or assigns. Manufacturer does not accept responsibility for the quality or quantity of any activities engaged in while alone or otherwise occupied.”
Mara…dogs and men are just like. It’s all a matter of proper training and neither likes to be punished. Positive reinforcement training techniques work best especially when treats are involved. I’ll just bet that Jack can back me up on that. [grin]
By RF
April 18, 2006 05:07 PM | Link to this
Randy- it’s not about confirming your beliefs, it’s about checking all relevant information. Lozen, like most of us, was probably raised in a good, church-going, God-fearing home where you never questioned the preacher or his interpretation of the “good book”. Once you grow up, some people begin thinking for themselves (those that don’t drink the Kool-Aid), and realize there’s sooooo much missing from most conservative pulpits these days. I read LOTS of stuff about lots of religions. Not to refute or challenge, but just to know all I can. Why are you fundamentalists sooo afraid of people asking questions and checking you out?? Afraid we just might see the cracks and flaws in your little boxes full of Jesus?
By Ken
April 19, 2006 08:07 AM | Link to this
RF… Is it possible that individuals can make the choice that nothing is missing from what you call “conservative pulpits”??? Perhaps many of these people have attempted to refute or challenge and return back to “the good book” b/c their findings lead them back.
I don’t think anyone of faith is afraid that you will find cracks or flaws in anything. By definition, faith is a belief in something that cannot be totally explained or reasoned.
Your implication that people with more conservative beliefs simply “drink the Kool-Aid” is just as appalling as the folks on the BLOG who indicate they know exactly what God thinks or says. You’re both being far too narrow in your thinking.
God is far bigger than anything humanity can dream of and there are individuals far more intelligent, self-reflective and critical than any of us who have found themselves led to Christ’s church.
By Jack
April 19, 2006 08:08 AM | Link to this
Yes Net, when I’m a good boy, I get a low calorie, high moral treat. Great insentive for being good.
By GOB
April 19, 2006 08:13 AM | Link to this
Got a question for Lozen, you said earlier you are reading a book about “Misquoted Jesus”. Why do you feel the need to read books about something you don’t believe??? I mean, I don’t believe in Buddism, Space Aliens nor Wicca but I don’t feel the need to try to confirm my beliefs with books that say that they aren’t real. If you really don’t believe in the Church, what’s putting pressure on you to try to stay in that belief system(non-believer)??? You see to be fighting it major.
Not to speak for anyone else, but the reason I try to learn as much about this stuff as possible is because it has, and continues to have such an enourmous impact on history. Considering how many people try to use the bible to justify what they do, and how they are attempting to control other people’s lives, it is vitally important to understand what it really says, as well as how it came to be in its present form. Belief or non-belief are irrelavent. The daily impact is there regardless.
By Ken
April 19, 2006 08:21 AM | Link to this
GOB… Do you spend just as much time reviewing books and opinions on Islam??? If you are studying for a purely historical value then I would argue that the religion of Islam is either on par or even exceeds the impact that Christianity has on the entire world.
By GOB
April 19, 2006 08:30 AM | Link to this
Ken - I didn’t say it was for purely historical value, but that I am interested because of the historical impact AND the continuing impact. I don’t spend as much time studying islam, but the last time I checked, the islamic right didn’t control the entire federal government and most state governments.
There is also something to be said about broadening your horizons. What is gained by only studying things you already believe to be true?
By RF
April 19, 2006 08:33 AM | Link to this
Ken- that’s part of my point. Many times people ask questions and find the truth right back where they started. Many, like Randy and others, seem to be incensed by the fact that people would question man’s interpretation of God’s will or word, and that seeking answers anywhere but the Bible is blasphemous. I’m not trying to be narrow-minded, I’m just tired of being brow beaten by some of the more conservative here who seem to think that questioning the Bible or God is inherently wrong. Some people think that human questions imply a lack of faith and trust in God. I think it’s just the opposite. And I agree with you that asking those questions can, and often does lead the questioner to a better understanding and firmer faith. Randy seems to think it’s unintelligent to ask questions and seek answers.
By Bruce
April 19, 2006 08:40 AM | Link to this
JBM, I am really sorry to bring this up but some of your comments from yesterday have had me thinking all night long and I have a question based some of the things you said.
Do you, as an ordained minister, believe the Bible to be the inspired word of God?
By RF
April 19, 2006 08:41 AM | Link to this
Manufacturer is not responsible for the quality of any boys supplied by the consumer or their agents or assigns. Manufacturer does not accept responsibility for the quality or quantity of any activities engaged in while alone or otherwise occupied.”
Dang legal clauses. You just don’t get as much for your buck these days.
RF - I can SO picture you waving me on in the pews… I even see the boys fidgeting next to you, asking, “how many more pages does she have???? She keeps flipping…” LOL!
Two words for you JBM—CHILDREN’S CHURCH As my granny would say “that’s the best thing to come along since sliced bread!” LOL
By Jack
April 19, 2006 08:46 AM | Link to this
The bible was not written by God. It was written by men. Mortal men. Men lie.
By Mara
April 19, 2006 08:54 AM | Link to this
Mornin’ all.
Archie, I was thinking about our exchange of posts yesterday and it seems to me that you do the same things that FM does. He (sort of) asks for input from the forum and then twists it into something it’s not. You ask what we think about a woman too lazy to clean her house. I say that laziness is non-gendered and anyone, female or male, who doesn’t clean up after themselves doesn’t deserve respect. Somehow, you twist it into an “excuse” for the lazy woman.
You asked why women don’t accept criticism without question and change their behaviour appropriately. My reply was that everyone should judge the validity of criticism, not just accept it as fact. If they disagree that the criticism has merit, they shouldn’t accept it as valid. Somehow, that too became an “excuse”.
I realized you weren’t really interested in the “why”s. You had already decided that women would excuse each other and provide “reasons” why the lazy or skeptical shouldn’t feel apologetic. Preconceived notions rarely yeild to reality, so anymore posts would be an exercise in futility.
On the other hand, you said that “It would be nice if women would pay attention to the complaints of the men of today”. Okay. Give us a list of your grievances and I, for one, will pay attention…
By Brian Curtis
April 19, 2006 09:01 AM | Link to this
Randy: Well, how often do you run across fanatical Wiccan missionaries trying to convert you? Or Eightfold Path-thumpers on message boards loudly condemning everyone for their stupidity in not seeing “the obvious truth”?
I’m sure you DON’T take the trouble to learn about others’ beliefs before making your decisions—your mind was made up long ago, without thinking at all. But the rest of us want to actually know what we’re talking about once in awhile.
-
Netb: Not exactly the same… remember, some men LIKE to be punished!
By Brian Curtis
April 19, 2006 09:03 AM | Link to this
Ken: The interesting thing is this—there are also people far more intelligent, self-reflective, and critical than any of us who have been led to the Jewish faith. Or the Mormon church. or Buddhism. Or atheism.
None of these people are stupid; and yet, they can’t all be right, can they? That’s why faith has nothing to do with intelligence. As you already pointed out, faith relies on something other than reasoning, so giving credit to Christians for their “intelligence” (as Randy does) is meaningless. Plenty of people just as smart, or smarter, have made other choices.
By Ken
April 19, 2006 09:05 AM | Link to this
Jack… No one said the Bible was written by God. All people of faith accept that it was written by men, but by men inspired by the Holy Spirit of God.
Just as a pastor will say a prayer asking God for guidance in what he/she says during that hominly, so too do we believe that the writers asked for God’s guidance in their writing translation of the books of the Bible.
RF… The incense you feel from many is b/c of their personal belief in God’s sovereignty over all of creation and their belief that God has a plan for his creation. When we do things that deviate from that perceived plan, it is seen as an afront to God. I too feel that way but simply do not make light of it in the same way.
Brow-beating no longer works b/c people are far too intelligent. When people couldn’t read or write, that worked, but now information is too readily available. If and when they find that compassion for all regardless of the flaws is far more powerful, they will become more effective.
You see, people like those you find frustrating have a difficult time separating the actions they do not agree with from the life that God created. All of God’s creation (including plants and animals) deserve our respect and compassion. They are gifts and we should not ever take them for granted.
By Renee
April 19, 2006 09:09 AM | Link to this
The bible was written by men who claimed to be inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Who knows if they actually were or weren’t.
By Randy
April 19, 2006 09:11 AM | Link to this
RF, I’m not incensed by people questioning the bible, I’ve questioned the bible and it has lead me to a greater understanding and a stronger faith. Lozen however seems to fight against having faith, it makes me wonder that maybe she has had a bad “defining moment” like Dr. Phil would say. Sometimes I think we look at the situation the wrong way. For example, non-believers say “I don’t see a creator so prove one exists”. Where I would take the approach, “I see all these things, trees, mountains, the vast universe and say how did these things appear in the beginning of time” in essence how could there possibly NOT be a creator. For me not to believe, would be believing in something that isn’t reasonable(no God). I find it much easier and logical and reasonable to believe a Creator does exist. Also, why would I want to believe God doesn’t exist, that I’m really no more important than a dead dog on the road when I die. I see absolutely no benefit in being a non-believer, to me it’s equivelant to having no faith in anything, (I can’t pass college, why go. I can’t be happily married, why get married. etc.) To me, a creator existing makes perfect sense, not believing is a defeatest attitude and doesn’t make sense.
By Jack
April 19, 2006 09:12 AM | Link to this
Agreed Ken, but men still lie.
By RF
April 19, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this
The bible was not written by God. It was written by men. Mortal men. Men lie
Jack’s a smart, practical, wise little troll.
By Randy
April 19, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this
Brian, There is a difference between intelligence and insightfulness. Intelligence means you know alot of facts about this world, book sense. True insightfulness(I call real intelligence) could be an aspect of a 6th grade educated person, they don’t know alot of information, however, they are clever. They know that they haven’t see God, but they haven’t seen the wind either. I met people on both ends of the spectrum, intelligent people who have no COMMON SENSE.
By chuck
April 19, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this
Let’s try something entirely different from our normal routine. Without using religion, the Bible, “philosophers”, cut-n-paste, google, statistics, research, name-calling, derogatory personal comments of any kind, or anything else beside our brains, choose one or more of the following and tell what if any societal value it has and why. I think it would be really valuable to see what each of us values and why. I think it would also explain why we defend or attack these practices. If you don’t want to give it a try I understand, but I think it would be a good intellectual exercise. Here goes:
Church
The Bible
Homosexuality
Heterosexuality
drugs
alcohol
smoking
public schools
private schools
welfare
public housing
retirement
legal immigration
illegal immigration
the military
the Republican Party
the Democratic Party
the Libertarian Party
Islam
Marriage
Divorce
Remember the rules. Give it a shot, the debate might actually be fun for a change.
By Jack
April 19, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this
“All of God’s creation (including plants and animals) deserve our respect and compassion. They are gifts and we should not ever take them for granted.”
Especially mosqioutoes, gnats, ticks and rats.
By Chilao
April 19, 2006 09:21 AM | Link to this
I read a book on the History of Islam once. Does that mean I subtly believe Islam is correct, as Randy’s question to Lozen implies? Must mean I was fighting the correctness of Islam my whole life, hence I had to read a book about it?
Been dealing with that kinda of flawed logic from people all my life.
In fact if I use the swear word GD(not going to spell it out out of respect for the religious here), I have been told that there must be a god, since people swear by him. the fact that that is a simple culturalism we are raised with is irrelevant thought to the Simple Minds. If we were not raised for it to be a swear word, it would not be used, pretty simple logic there really.
By Mara
April 19, 2006 09:22 AM | Link to this
Jack, I’ll try to keep the lyric clues confined to the B98.5 playlist, just to keep it fair for ya LOL!!
this one should be a pretty easy crossover, familiar to Jack, Chilao, and Eirik…good luck guys :^)
Sunday morning when we go down to church
See the menfolk standin’ in line
They say they come to pray to the Lord
When my little girl, looks so fine
By Just Being Me
April 19, 2006 09:23 AM | Link to this
Bruce, as I’ve often said, my life is an open book for the most part. No need to apologize (not to me, anyway) for bringing anything up…
As for your question - and forgive me for splitting hairs, but I am admittedly anal when it comes to wording - I wouldn’t say that I, as an ordained minister, believe in anything. As a person, as “JBM,” I believe the Bible to be the inspired and infallible word of God.
By Justin
April 19, 2006 09:23 AM | Link to this
Whiley, I am not a cheater nor an abuser. The only thing I am guilty of is selecting the wrong woman and not wanting to be henpecked! Her mother may rule her father, but she will not rule me. And, I hate to say this, many of today’s women think they should rule their house. They actually brag about it to their friends. “Yes, I have my husband in check!”
What makes a woman successful in business and her career are not necessarily the talents which will assist her in having a successful relationship or marriage. Trying to break a person down in order to control them is not good whether one is male or female. And, many women will push a man away with that attitude.
By RF
April 19, 2006 09:23 AM | Link to this
Brow-beating no longer works b/c people are far too intelligent. When people couldn’t read or write, that worked, but now information is too readily available. If and when they find that compassion for all regardless of the flaws is far more powerful, they will become more effective.
Excellent point Ken!! Problem is, we’re a bit overwhelmed here with “how can you NOT see it when it’s so obvious??” It just isn’t to some, for whatever reason. Thanks for realizing the importance of respecting even a ‘sinner’s’ intelligence. You alllllright, dude!!
By Renee
April 19, 2006 09:24 AM | Link to this
I see absolutely no benefit in being a non-believer, to me it’s equivelant to having no faith in anything,
Humans feel the need to believe in something, and what humans have believed in varies greatly among different civilizations, both old and new. So, I believe in Buddha, but I die and found out I should have following Athena, or I read the Bible, finding out the Qu’Ran is the real book. Belief is just that, a belief. While yours, mine, or anybody’s belief might be strong, it doesn’t make it fact.
The beliefs differ so much among Christians alone. I could ask why would someone want to be arguing for the rest of their life about how their belief is the correct one, trying to convert and browbeat others. So many people who follow Christianity don’t seem happy. They send the attitude that they hate the world and all the bad people in it. Doesn’t look appealing to me.
By Ken
April 19, 2006 09:28 AM | Link to this
Renee… Why so cynical??? There have been many documents written throughout history (i.e. our Constitution) that have shaped our country and our world. Do you share the same cynical feelings with them?
Brian… I don’t know if they are all right or if they are all wrong. You will never get me to definitively answer that question b/c I don’t know the answer. It is not my place to make that call.
Nor will I ever link one’s intelligence to their faith. God created each individual with the freedom and intelligence to make their own choices. Some choose to control their own lives and shut God completely out. Some turn their lives completely over to God. Some, like myself (actually I believe most), are somewhere in the middle. The you choose is between you and God. Period.
By Randy
April 19, 2006 09:34 AM | Link to this
Brian, I have thought about being a missionary and I admire them immensely. Look at the sacrafice that they give up, many give up a stable environment, easy homelife and many their lives. Why, because they want to help, most help with the underpreviledged people in other 3rd world nations. Most of the work is helping with food and medical needs, then they may talk to them about Jesus. Take care of their physical needs first, then their spiritual needs. I guess why their is so many missionaries helping and so few others goes back to selfish and self-centered people. The missionaries aren’t those things and non-believers tend more to be those things(selfish and self-centered).
By GOB
April 19, 2006 09:34 AM | Link to this
Just as a pastor will say a prayer asking God for guidance in what he/she says during that hominly, so too do we believe that the writers asked for God’s guidance in their writing translation of the books of the Bible.
So, using this logic, if you believe that the bible really is the inspired word of god, wouldnt it stand that you believe any preacher who prays for guidence before a homily is giving the inspired word of god? That is a scary thought considering so of the things that have been preached from the pulpit (ie. slavery is good, etc)
By Just Being Me
April 19, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this
Brow-beating no longer works b/c people are far too intelligent. When people couldn’t read or write, that worked, but now information is too readily available. If and when they find that compassion for all regardless of the flaws is far more powerful, they will become more effective.
And once again, the nail has been hit on the head. Excellent, Ken! (And, welcome back).
By the way, Renee isn’t “cynical.” I think she has honest and reasonable concerns/questions about faith in God, Christianity, and the Bible. To me, she is typical of a widespread leaning toward obtaining information as opposed to the blind acceptance of beliefs as fact (as you alluded to). Not to say that my way is always right, but I find that people like Renee want honest, straightforward answers. They aren’t always out to challenge you just for the heck of it, or ridicule your faith - sometimes, they really want answers to some of christianity’s most puzzling questions.
By chuck
April 19, 2006 09:40 AM | Link to this
I think that marriage and really strong families keep America strong. Kids without strong support groups don’t usually do well in school or life. Children need good role models who show them over time what it means to be good citizens, good fathers, good mothers, good employees, good employers, good people.
When kids KNOW that they have a stable situation at home it gives them the confidence to take risks and excel. When children know the boundaries of acceptable behavior they feel secure, safe and loved.
Children also need to know what it means to COMMIT. They need to see that problems between adults can be worked out without violence and bitterness. They need to see the stick-to-it-iveness that comes through that commitment. That running away from problems only postpones the consequences rather than eliminating them.
That’s why I think marriage is important and makes America a better place to live. Children raised by apes don’t usually turn out like Tarzan. They need love, correction, and 2 parents.
By RF
April 19, 2006 09:41 AM | Link to this
Randy- don’t fall off your chair dude, but (gulp) I agree with you that logically God exists. I did a paper back in the stone ages in college about it, and it seems logical to me too. But, you have to realize, and accept, that perfectly intelligent people don’t see it the way you or I do. They have a right to their choice, and many feel as certain of their choice as your or I do. I may not agree with them, but I respect their right to choose, and I can’t see them as desperate or unintelligent because of their choices. And they’ve made conscious choices based on their beliefs. Their faith is just as logical as yours or mine, it’s just different. Remember, faith is belief in something for which there is no proof. It isn’t logical and never has to be. Their faith (and choosing something other than our God requires faith in that system) doesn’t require any more logic than yours or mine.
By GOB
April 19, 2006 09:43 AM | Link to this
Also, why would I want to believe God doesn’t exist, that I’m really no more important than a dead dog on the road when I die.
Isn’t this the reason that man has had some form of religion, essentially since we came out of the caves? It is a way to protect ourselves against the fear of the unknown, and death is the ultimate unknown.
By Just Being Me
April 19, 2006 09:44 AM | Link to this
Chuck, I haven’t had my second cup of coffee yet, but here’s a starter:
Homosexuality - Adds diversity to our culture. Plus, homosexuals stimulate the economy; after all, we are the best tippers. LOL!
Islam and Legal Immigration also add diversity.
Marriage - I personally believe that overall, married or stable co-habitating couples produce the best children. Without disregard for the exceptions, I maintain that two-parent homes are the best for raising productive citizens.
Church - I’m a little disheartened by the church, so personally I feel that it adds a lot less value to society than it once did, and a lot less than it could. I do believe in the former benefits of a religious upbringing, particularly in a church-going family.
By Bruce
April 19, 2006 09:48 AM | Link to this
Thanks JBM its just that some of your comments tend to say otherwise. Thanks for clearing that up.
By Justin
April 19, 2006 09:49 AM | Link to this
Renee, I agree with your 9:24 post. So many Christians do seem to be unhappy. I often think about how so many countries were conquered. First, the missionaries, then the armies…
By RF
April 19, 2006 09:49 AM | Link to this
and non-believers tend more to be those things(selfish and self-centered).
Because we’re all human, I think all but a precious few fall into that category Randy. It’s a sweeping, logicall weak stereotypical statement you have made. I have actually found that most non-believers tend to be very educated and articulate individuals, who think much more carefully than many believers. I know a LOT of narrowly focused “christians” (well, avid churchgoers with the belief that they are God’s chosen people) who are far less charitable, loving, giving, and self-sacrificing.
By Randy
April 19, 2006 09:50 AM | Link to this
I hate to break the news to you all but Brow-beating has never worked. People may be more book intelligent(which is really useless for the most part, I almost have an MBA and don’t use 10% of the stuff I learned in College), but they were just as insightful in days past as they are today(on spiritual matters). There have always been people who resisted the love of Jesus. What does work is God, you don’t find God in your head you find him in your heart.
By lozen
April 19, 2006 09:50 AM | Link to this
RF, that’s great. I have to remember this wonderful line: “Afraid we just might see the cracks and flaws in your little boxes full of Jesus?” And GOB is right; the church and the bible have enormous impact on everyone’s life in this country whether we believe in it or not. The bible has been used to keep women in their place throughout history. It’s been used to argue that the only way we should ever have sex is in the “holy bonds of matrimony”. It’s been used to tell women they can’t be ministers and priests. It’s been used to justify beating children. It’s been used to sanctify war. It was used to justify slavery. It was used to hold back scientific research for years. If some religious had their way, we’d all been bound in every area of our lives by the rules and regulations set by a group of men who were very limited in their understanding of the world, the universe, human nature, geography, other cultures. Science has made such incredible leaps, we have learned so much, and still, we are expected to follow rules that make no sense because “the bible says so”. That’s why I study religion. And no, Ken, I don’t study islam as much as christianity because it doesn’t have the huge impact on my life that christianity does.
By Chilao
April 19, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this
My experience with the missionary crowd, (and doubt I ever mentioned, but I hardly lived in the USA until I was 10, but was born here), in fact still have a missionary cousin in Africa(Zimbabwe).
People with low self-esteem become missionaries, so they can go to the Third World and be the esteemed Buwana(sp?). (looked up to/revered) if you will. Always talking about all the Good that they did for those less fortunate, smug of course in their religious superiority to those heathens.
call me cynical about missionaries, that’s fine, I lived the life as a youngster. Been to 6 countries before I was ten, 5 if you exclude Canada.
By Justin
April 19, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this
Chuck, your 9:40 post. Amen!
By chuck
April 19, 2006 09:54 AM | Link to this
Churches would be important to society even if there was no God. Churches serve as focal points in many communities across America. They pull people together to do charitable projects that benefit the poor and abused. They serve as shelters for battered women and children. They lead the way in keeping behavior in check…in other words, they keep society from devolving into an anything goes, “the only thing that matters is me”, anarchical mess.
By Julia
April 19, 2006 09:54 AM | Link to this
So many people who follow Christianity don’t seem happy. They send the attitude that they hate the world and all the bad people in it. Doesn’t look appealing to me.
I just want to say a great big “THANKS!” to all the people who make that statement possible! Good job folks. (not)
By Justin
April 19, 2006 09:54 AM | Link to this
RF, my ex is “one” of those narrowly focused “Christians”.
By Mara
April 19, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this
Randy - out of curiosity, what criteria and/or statistics convinced you that non-believers tend to be more self-centered and selfish than Christians? Just wondering because it seems that in light of the sheer difference in numbers of adherents, it would be shocking if there were as many non-religious volunteer groups, but I wonder what the percentage per population numbers look like. Do you have un-biased numbers, or is this just your opinion?
By RF
April 19, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this
Justin- she sounds like a buddy of mine’s wife. She goes to church because she gets sympathy from them for being such a longsuffering wife and mother. She’s got serious emotional issues, and all her church does is enable her. Sound familiar?
By Just Being Me
April 19, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this
So, using this logic, if you believe that the bible really is the inspired word of god, wouldnt it stand that you believe any preacher who prays for guidence before a homily is giving the inspired word of god? That is a scary thought considering so of the things that have been preached from the pulpit (ie. slavery is good, etc)
Not necessarily, GOB. The Bible teaches those who believe to beware of those who pretend to speak for God but don’t. It warns of false prophets, wolves in sheeps’ clothing, and instructs us to study for ourselves and always “check” the preached word against the written Word (Bible).
So no, I don’t believe in “any” preacher who asks for guidance. And, I usually tell the congregation not to take my word for anything but to check it against the Word.
By Randy
April 19, 2006 10:02 AM | Link to this
RF, Some good points, you are right human nature makes us selfish and self-centered. I don’t think non-believers are unintelligent, but like I said before, you don’t find God in your head, you find him in your heart(spirit). I don’t really know any non-believers except on this site(I guess Candide is one). I do feel that they are for the most part well educated, as I feel that “pride in education” is a road block from finding God. It’s a weapon used by evil to prevent people from finding Jesus, “Oh your to intelligent to believe in God” and they buy that. I see them as intelligent but not “cleverly smart”. Big difference.
By Jack
April 19, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this
Hey hey what can I do? I got a woman she won’t be true. Lord hear what I say, I got a woman wants to ball all day.
Now I be singing this all day. (under my breath of course)
By RF
April 19, 2006 10:04 AM | Link to this
good 9:50 Lozen. Very rational explanation. The box full of Jesus comment was borrowed from a buddy of mine who saw some kind of Easter display in a HUGE box outside a church and came up with the line. The analogy fits alllll too often.
By RF
April 19, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this
Julia- thank you for being one of those who proves christianity is still a religion of happiness. I was beginning to wonder… :-)
By Renee
April 19, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this
Thank you for clarifying for me JBM.
Julia - just keep doing what you do.
Why are non-believers more self-centered and selfish. Personally, I will give my right arm (figuratively speaking) for someone. I truly love everyone, short of evil people, and keep my mind open at all times. I understand that good people do bad things. I have learned not to hold grudges. I do what I can to help someone in need, sometimes completely selflessly. I do what I can to make myself and my daughter a productive member of society, and there are charitable organizations that I adamantly support.
See, you don’t have to believe in God to be a good person. Now do I do things that are not what a “good” person would do. Yes, most definitely. But how is that any different from a devout Christian sinning on a daily basis.
By Archie
April 19, 2006 10:11 AM | Link to this
“I realized you weren’t really interested in the “why”s. You had already decided that women would excuse each other and provide “reasons” why the lazy or skeptical shouldn’t feel apologetic. Preconceived notions rarely yeild to reality, so anymore posts would be an exercise in futility.”
Mara that is not a true paragraph. Some women do make a lot of excuses but if you check back you will see I agree with some of what you had to say. I said you over-intellectualized my pool example. Some women actually handle criticism very well and if you remember the young lady did do what I told her later on and she was happy with the results. I said the young lady was a pleasant person period not because she followed my advice. As for FM people say he overcomplicates things,well when that same criticism is turned towards them they don’t handle it very well. I just saw the joke by Monica and it was funny!! Also Mara I was not referring to your post about laziness as an excuse,I was referring to the post about my pool example. I am interested in how women think but you can’t expect me not to comment on it. As for my grievances I have already posted about women that don’t want to clean and women that don’t want to cook. Also awhile back I posted about women that don’t speak, they have a frown on their faces constantly. There are times when I don’t greet a woman and she wonders if I am stuck up but it’s really a response to the non-speaking women that came before her. I know men do bad stuff but if I am not that guy don’t take it out on me. Another grievance is that there’s nothing wrong with thinking things out but some times just take the criticism because you know if it’s meant constructively or not. Mara I appreciate you wanting to hear my grievances and I hope those don’t anyone uncomfortable but then again as men we have all kinds of things said to our faces. I’m in pretty good mood so I will be more aware of any negative comments on my part but the attitude Monica expressed with that joke was pretty good. This is a blog so it ain’t that serious. I really don’t have alot of bad things to say about women in general but there are some specific incidents that are on my mind. Keep in mind I do have a spouse and a daughter and although I criticize at times I think both of them are pretty doggone good.
By Just Being Me
April 19, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this
Thanks JBM its just that some of your comments tend to say otherwise. Thanks for clearing that up
Bruce, perhaps when taken out of context, my comments may appear to contradict my belief in the Word of God. But, I don’t think I’ve ever said anything contrary to my belief that the Bible is the inspired Word of God. Nevertheless, I’m glad you brought it to my attention so I can be more careful to make sure that my comments are in line with my beliefs.
By RF
April 19, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this
It’s a weapon used by evil to prevent people from finding Jesus, “Oh your to intelligent to believe in God” and they buy that. Can’t agree with you on that one Randy. That sounds like a preacher I grew up listening to who actually told us not to question God, but to accept his wisdom without question. Some people need that narrow, focused lifestyle. I would think God would want us to be intelligent and able to answer the questions people have with confidence. God help us if intelligence EVER becomes a “weapon of evil”. We’ll end up back in grass huts and dancing around fire pits before long.
By GOB
April 19, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this
I see them as intelligent but not “cleverly smart”.
But you see people who let their lives be completly controlled by a book that was written hundreds of years ago as clever? This is really not a knock on that, but i dont think relying on someone else (or a book) to tell you how to live can be called clever or insightful.
By Monica
April 19, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this
GOB, In response to your 9:34…
That’s why I read the Bible. I don’t blindly follow a preacher just because he is a preacher (too bad Jim Jones’ congregation did not feel the same as I). I trust a preacher (pastor, minister, etc) to deliver the word of God without adding a personal agenda, but I also know that preachers are also humans who sin and make mistakes. If a preacher delivers a sermon that doesn’t align with the Bible, which I believe is inspired by the word of God, then I will call him or her on it.
Sadly, there are churches that don’t emphasize personal study of the Bible for that reason; they want their “flock” to follow them without any question (drink the juice, brothers, drink!). RF and Ken are right; it’s good to question your own belief system, not necessarily for doubting what you believe, but re-affirming what you believe. My Sunday school teacher (yes, I go to an adult Sunday School class - sounds funny referring to the “teacher”) even said that he is a doubter by nature, and that’s not a bad thing. It’s part of the beauty of free will and choice.
By Randy
April 19, 2006 10:15 AM | Link to this
Mara, ?. Non-believers being more self-centered and selfish, EXPERIENCE, statistics tend to reflect the numbers wished by the statistician. Don’t get me wrong, I know many Christians who are very selfish and self-centered, however, missionaries are the least of these. The sacrafice they do is great, I can’t do it(i’m to selfish).
On the subject of cracks and flaws, first of all let me say that I believe the bible is the inspired word of God. However, it wouldn’t matter if it weren’t. I know that there is a creator of the universe, logically he would make himself known and would want and probably need to bond with him(which I have). There are some people who have never heard of Jesus, however I believe that at some point in their lives, they looked out over a mountian(or some other spiritual moment) and said my spirit wants to bond with the entity who started all this(the creator).
By House plans
April 19, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this
http://sugame.servegame.com/Creditcounseling/index.html Credit counseling
http://sugame.servegame.com/Highrisklenders/index.html High risk lenders
http://sugame.servegame.com/Wrongfuldeathattorney/index.html Wrongful death attorney
http://sugame.servegame.com/Houseplans/index.html House plans
By Justin
April 19, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this
RF, definitely sounds familiar. My ex is neither suffering or in financial straits. I wish she would find a man, be happy, and leave me alone. I think more and more people are finding out that she has emotional issues. I suggested she get counseling. I know I need it for some of my issues. But I truly think she is crazy! That is why I worry about my children. However, the state of Georgia has taken it out of my hands. Of course, they won’t be around to take care of the results of their meddling.
During a revival, a minister stated, “Many women go home and say, the pastor said do this and the pastor said do this.” He stated, “don’t do that, women should work on their relationship with their husbands first and foremost and don’t look at the pastor as a surrogate husband”. In the Black community, with the high rate of single women, the pastor of the church has become their surrogate husband. It truly makes it difficult for other men.
By Randy
April 19, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this
GOB, Don’t know anyone who follows blindly.
Monica, Great post, preachers are human, they can make mistakes, look for intention on their part.
By chuck
April 19, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this
Mara, I’m not trying to speak for Randy, but I assume you are referring to the recent statistics that came out saying that 85% of Americans claim to be Christians. I can tell you from personal research that those numbers are laughable. Many (maybe most) people who say they are Christians are NOT Christians in the real sense of the word. Here is the definition of a Christian:
A Christian is a person who not only BELIEVES in Christ, but one who has also accepted Jesus as SAVIOR AND LORD of his or her life. Christians have made a concious decision to repent of their sins and follow Christ. This is OFTEN referred to as having a “BORN AGAIN” experience. They rely on this experience alone to take them to heaven.
Most of the people in the recent polls believe they are Christians because “Mama and them was members of that Baptist church down in Waycross”. You can’t be BORN a Christian, you can only be BORN AGAIN a Christian. It is amazing how many of these “christians” I talk to have the philosophy that when they get to the pearly gates, God is going to put everything they did on some kind of heavenly scale and if the good outweighs the bad He will let them in. That is not how Christianity works. Jesus said “I am the way, the truth and the life. No man cometh to the Father but by Me.” There may be higher numbers of “mouth” Christians than non-Christians in America, but there are not more HEART Christians than non-Christians.
By Archie
April 19, 2006 10:27 AM | Link to this
” think that marriage and really strong families keep America strong. Kids without strong support groups don’t usually do well in school or life. Children need good role models who show them over time what it means to be good citizens, good fathers, good mothers, good employees, good employers, good people.
When kids KNOW that they have a stable situation at home it gives them the confidence to take risks and excel. When children know the boundaries of acceptable behavior they feel secure, safe and loved.”
Good job Chuck. Good job Chuck. I certainly hope you didn’t think that I could not compliment you. Good job.
By Randy
April 19, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this
Great post Chuck, absolutely right. I believe in parachutes also, but if I don’t have one on when I jump out of a plane i’m in big trouble. You can’t just believe in Jesus you must be born-again(sounds weird, means just having a spiritual birth). Yes 85% of people would say that they are Christian, who knows how many really are. Must BOND with the creator.
By Justin
April 19, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this
Throwaway Dads
www.fathermag.com/news/3784-TDads.shtml www.michbar.org/journal/article.cfm?articleID=329&volumeID=22
By Mara
April 19, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this
Okay Archie, fair enough. I’ve cleaned up the list a little, but correct it if it’s not right…
Women don’t want to clean
Women don’t want to cook
Women punish men for the way they’ve been treated by other men
Women who don’t speak to you frown constantly
Women don’t greet you all the time
Women think you’re stuck up if you don’t greet them
Women should sometimes just take criticism without thinking about it.
Did I miss any?
GOB - nice comment @ 10:14
By chuck
April 19, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this
Thank you Archie and Justin. Did I just say that? kidding.
By Quoter
April 19, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this
“Every child needs to know that he or she is the most important person in the world to somebody.” Pres. Bill Clinton
By Just Being Me
April 19, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this
Wow, I think this is like the first time I agree with chuck. Your 10:22 was on point, although I would add to the definition of a real “christian” that he/she is one who seeks to adopt the heart, characteristics, teachings, traits and attributes of Jesus Christ.
By Ken
April 19, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this
Lozen… The issues you speak of are not issues with the Bible, they are issues with humanity. To place blame on one collection of documents shows a very myopic point of view. One that I’m sure has been shaped by pain that you persoanlly felt from your experiences.
Please rememeber that many positive things have been accomplished due influence from the Bible as well.
How many millions of meals have been served?
How many millions of people have been clothed?
How many millions of children have been cared for?
How many houses have been built?
Nothing that has the hand of humans will ever be perfect. The best we can do is learn from our past and continue to move forward.
By lozen
April 19, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this
Bless your heart Randy. Have you ever read Hawaii for the story of what the missionaries did there? Have you ever studied other cultures who didn’t believe in your Yahweh but still had unselfish people who were concerned about others? Like the Alqonquin indians for example, who never made a decision without thinking about how it would effect the next eight generations? Just think what our world could be like if our christian leaders of the past had done that! You like to think people who don’t believe as you do are all self centered and selfish people but that just is not true. You need a god to believe you’re special; I don’t. You need a god to feel better about dying some day; I don’t. I do have faith Randy. In my heart I know I’m fine and I don’t worry about death because I’ll be just fine then too.
I don’t believe in Yahweh. I don’t know if there was a spirit that caused the world to come into being. I don’t believe the bible has all the answers. I don’t believe the bible was inspired any more than the Koran or the Upanishads or any of the many religious books in this world. If god gave us the bible as the only true guide why is it that most people can’t read the original bible manuscripts for themselves? If the bible was inspired by Yahweh, why didn’t he care about all the mistakes and changes made by the copiers in the first three centuries after jesus before some of those books were gathered into the official bible? You don’t know what the bible said. You don’t know what jesus really said, you just think you do. You don’t believe in learning, reading, questioning or using your intelligence. I do. If there is a spirit who created everything, why did that spirit give us a brain if we aren’t supposed to use it?
By GOB
April 19, 2006 10:39 AM | Link to this
GOB, Don’t know anyone who follows blindly.
Then I would question your sincerity when you say everyone you know is a believer. Do you really think they have all thought through what they believe and the reasons behind it? The only reason the church still has the power it does is because so many people follow blindly.
If a person has thought through what they believe and knows why they believe it, cool. What bothers me so much are those who have strong beliefs on something, but when you ask them why, they cant tell you. That has been the predominant experiance i have had with most christians.
By Monica
April 19, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this
Renee,
I’m a happy Christian! If you can’t tell, then I need to work on that! I’m acutally reading a book on that subject right now: “Me and My Big Mouth.” It greatly emphasizes positive talk, and not negative talk. The main scripture reference for this study is Philippians 4:8.
Christians who aren’t happy focus more on God’s law and not on God’s grace and love.
By Just Being Me
April 19, 2006 10:44 AM | Link to this
Contrary to what some non-believers think, faith or lack thereof has nothing to do with intelligence. Believing doesn’t mean you’re intelligent (or unintelligent) and not believing doesn’t mean you’re ignorant (or smart).
I get a little offended when people use the “intelligence” argument.
By Just Being Me
April 19, 2006 10:46 AM | Link to this
As for my grievances I have already posted about women that don’t want to clean and women that don’t want to cook. Also awhile back I posted about women that don’t speak, they have a frown on their faces constantly.
I’m totally not getting into this argument, but I want to point out that saying “I’ve posted about women that don’t want to clean” is not the same as saying “women don’t want to clean.”
Just a minor point…
By Bruce
April 19, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this
No JBM I am sure it was I that misunderstood what you were saying please forgive me.
By Archie
April 19, 2006 10:50 AM | Link to this
Mara your list is correct except you should preface everything with some women. I have not said all women do this or that. Mara I a lot of those things on the list were talked about on the Michael Baisden show when it was the guy’s turn to complain. He allowed both sexes to air out their grievances which is nice since we hear so much from one side. Michael Baisden caters primarily to a predominantly black audience on the radio but he welcomes all people. I don’t know if anyone should just take criticism without thinking about it but hopefully I can make this clear sometimes when you know you don’t know what you’re doing you should accept criticism and move on. I think Netbanker is a money person so if he told me my way of dealing with money needed a change then I would probably accept that and move on because of what I know about my personal situation. I don’t go around offering advice or even an opinion when it’s not asked for but in the example I used yesterday it was appropiate.
By Randy
April 19, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this
Lozen, There you are wrong, I don’t need a God to feel special or be comfortable when I die. However, logically I know one exists. When I look at the total situation again as I said before, logically and reasonably I can’t see how a universe as vast as ours could possibly exists without a creator. Things just don’t appear out of thin air without help. I was raised by my father who could have been a drill sargeant in the marines, if logically I felt there was a logical reason to the universe, I would be fine with that. But there being NO creator, doesn’t make any sense, in any way shape or form.
By GOB
April 19, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this
Please rememeber that many positive things have been accomplished due influence from the Bible as well.
How many millions of meals have been served?
How many millions of people have been clothed?
How many millions of children have been cared for?
How many houses have been built?
I dont think anyone would say that the bible has not inspired good works in the last 2000 years. But, based on your examples above, think about all the evil that has been caused in the world by christians.
How many millions of fields of crops have been destroyed?
How many millions of people have been killed because they werent believers?
How many millions of children have been orphaned?
How many millions of homes have been burned?
By Mara
April 19, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this
Ok, in order then…
Randy - first you said you didn’t know any non-believers except from this forum, and then you say that “experience” leads you to believe that non-christians are more selfish than christians. How can you accumulate experience if you don’t actually know any non-believers?
chuck - seriously? you ain’t a christian if you haven’t been “born again”? Man, the Pope’s gonna be p** about this!! LOL! In other words, unless one believe the same way you, chuck, believes…you ain’t christian. got it.
By Jack
April 19, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this
After reading this week’s posts. We don’t need to go to church this week. We have had the chance to read many sermons.
See ya later.
By Archie
April 19, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this
“I’m totally not getting into this argument, but I want to point out that saying “I’ve posted about women that don’t want to clean” is not the same as saying “women don’t want to clean.”
Just a minor point…”
Thanks JBM, woman you are interesting. I did not expect read that you were Pentecostal minister. Hope my spelling was correct.
By Renee
April 19, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this
Monica - good job. Of course the statement I made doesn’t apply to all Christians, but the ones it does apply to, make it harder for the ones who are truly trying to spread the message with love.
By GOB
April 19, 2006 10:59 AM | Link to this
Things just don’t appear out of thin air without help.
Except, apparently, the creator…
By Randy
April 19, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this
Lozen, OK I’ll play, let’s say all us Christians are wrong. What is the penalty, I live a very happy life, and I die and become dirt. Not great, but could be worse. Now, what if your wrong and let’s say the bible is absolutely correct(WOW what a concept)and HELL does exist, you go there for eternity, torture, everything you want you can see but can’t have. I have said this before, but my worse case scenerio is your and other non-believers best case scenerio. Yours is a lose/lose, my is a win/win. However, this is not why I am a Christian, I to could be a non-believer, however, when Jesus called on me I accepted his love(I didn’t reject him). It’t the smartest and most important thing I’ve ever done.
By Randy
April 19, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this
GOB, Creator needs to be someone who hasn’t appeared out of thin air??? I wouldn’t want to follow a creator who had to be created. The creator needs to be eternal, always existing.
The Pope may be born-again, in fact Catholics are in the same boat as we are. If they think because their parents are Chrisitans or that someone sprinkled water over their heads a babies make them Christians they and we are both wrong. It’s a spiritual decision. A bonding of your spirit with God’s. It’s really like, falling in love with someone. Only you fall in love with Jesus.
By lozen
April 19, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this
Jack, I know you can’t leave! You are a blog addict. Don’t kid around.
By The72John
April 19, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this
Please rememeber that many positive things have been accomplished due influence from the Bible as well
I was going to comment here, but GOB beat me to it. Far mor evil has been done in the name of religion than good. The history of the world is bathed in the blood of people who have killed and been killed in the name of religion. It is used to justify prejudice, hatred, abuse, slavery and every other base human impulse. It has held back science and progress for millenia and destroyed entire cultures.
There is no greater evil in this world than organized religion. Period.
By Renee
April 19, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this
JBM good point at 10:46.
Randy - that is the problem right there I have with religion. The messaage is join us or look forward to an eternity of hell (which I am not convinced on anyway).
Wouldn’t a better message be, join us, we are about love, and peace and spreading the gospel. Or something similar to that.
When brow beating doesn’t work, scare tactics will LOL.
By Jack
April 19, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this
“Things just don’t appear out of thin air without help.”
What invisible and smells like carrots?
Bunny Farts.
By Chilao
April 19, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this
LOL @ GOB - not going there, stumped me from day one, no one could answer my question “Who put him there?”, follwing the logic presented to me to get there, but it all stopped there. HUH?
I think I mentioned before, but if the Bible was truly the inspired word of God, you would think he would have been making every effort over the centuries to not only see that it was translated correctly from version to version, he would have made every effort to see that it was not misused for this, that or the other, foul deed.
I mentioned going to the Dead Sea Scrolls exhibit, and it was VERY INTERESTING to read something like the Ten Commandments, in their expansive original form, and learn the King James Version has an EXTREMELY abbreviated version.
By Mara
April 19, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this
Archie, I think that what we have here is a failure to communicate.
When you say “criticism” do you mean “disapproval expressed by pointing out faults or shortcomings” or are you talking about an “opinion about what could or should be done about a situation or problem”?
I’ll give you a hint…one is the definition of criticism, the other defines advice…
By lozen
April 19, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this
Randy, jesus has never called on me. If your god does exist and he sends me to hell because I could not believe what you believe, then I’ll deal with that the best way I can when it happens. I don’t believe it’s going to happen because I don’t believe there’s a hell. I don’t worry about going someplace that, in my opinion, does not exist but was created by man.
By The72John
April 19, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this
Except, apparently, the creator…
And particle pairs around the event horizon of a black hole.
I think if people made a poster of Randy and some of his inane postings and hung them around the world, we’d eliminate the scourge of Christianity once and for all.
By Julia
April 19, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this
Jack-there have been more people trashing the bible and Christians than there have been sermons. (In my opinion anyway.)
GOB-are you talking about the Catholic Inquisitions and Crusades?
JBM & Monica-you ladies are doing great!
Chuck-I agree with your last several posts. The Catholics I’ve talked to do not know what being “born again” means. They think being sprinkled with water as an infant is the same as being born again. (Now, this isn’t the same as infant “dedications” where parents ask the minister to pray with them for their child.) I’m talking about people thinking they were born again as an infant (when they had no knowledge of Christ and could not make that commitment). In other words, you can’t make someone else born-again. They have to make that choice themselves.
The Catholic argued that we could even take a homeless man, tie him up and take him to church and have the priest sprinkle him against his wishes and the man would be born again. I said that was incorrect, that it has to be the individual’s own decision to accept Christ and ask forgiveness for themselves. What’s your take on it? (By the way, thanks for the apology the other day. I appreciate it.)
By Jack
April 19, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this
Lozen you know me too well. If this keeps up, I may be saved.
By GOB
April 19, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this
Randy - That is a cop out. You are arguing that everything had to be created by some higher power, except for, of course the higher power. That is majorly flawed logic. If you were to say your belief was based on faith, cool, but you are trying to prove faith logically, and it simply doesnt hold up.
By Brian Curtis
April 19, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this
Randy’s the epitome of smug arrogance that drives people away from churches, particularly (in this country) Christian ones. For example, he assumes that
Anyone who doesn’t believe in the Bible has either never read or didn’t understand it;
People who aren’t Christian simply haven’t THOUGHT about it hard enough, because they don’t realize their beliefs are nonsensical and irrational;
Anyone who points out the deceptions and hypocrisies of Christians is “fighting against what they KNOW is true” and “struggling to resist the faith burning within them” or other such zealot nonsense;
Nonbelievers are not only irrational, they’re also selfish and self-centered.
And the best part is-—he honestly doesn’t understand why anyone would find these attitudes insulting or condescending! After all, he and his church know best, right? And anyone who doubts or questions that is just a stupid, lost little child in need of guidance from their betters (i.e., him). Who could POSSIBLY have a problem with that?
Chuck: I don’t usually answer your religion-based posts because there’s no point in debating with hardcore beliefs, but I’m in a mellow enough mood to go ahead and address your “no cut-and-paste” questions. As I see it, the value of these items is as follows:
Church, the Bible, Islam: Preserves social order, at the expense of reinforcing sheeplike submission to authority. Occasionally inspires people to noble acts of self-sacrifice and social work.
Homosexuality, heterosexuality: Inborn instincts linked to a biological pleasure impulse. When consensual, they’re equally harmless and fun. In some cases, heterosexual sex can lead to reproduction, itself of value when desired or negative when not desired.
Drugs, alcohol, smoking: Substances that also produce physical pleasure, with varying degrees of accompanying risk. For some, the beneficial effects outweigh the negatives; for others, vice-versa.
Public schools, housing, welfare, retirement benefits: Providing a basic level of equality and dignity for all citizens regardless of individual circumstances; a hallmark of a civilized society.
Private schools: A more expensive option for those who can afford it and want to give their kids a specialized education (in some cases a backward, bigoted education, but that’s your choice).
Legal immigration: The result of economic opportunities in the U.S. that are unavailable elsewhere.
Illegal immigration: The same.
Military: An unfortunate necessity in a not-yet civilized world; a last resort when diplomacy fails, or else a highly trained emergency-response force in case of disasters.
Marriage, Divorce: Social attachments and detachments some people choose to make, currently entangling both religious and governmental status for a variety of confusing reasons. Their societal value is unclear. Often discussed in terms of “the welfare of children,” although parenting is not a requirement.
Republican Party: The party of the wealthy and big business, currently hijacked by neocon lunatics and successfully duping working-class religious folks into supporting them by pretending to share their social values. Value: A bad example of what America might become without positive action.
Democratic Party: A spineless organization of Republican wanna-bes who’ve lost touch with the working class’s needs and values, but don’t dare rediscover them for fear of offending campaign contributors. Value: A reminder of what weak principles not backed by strong action can accomplish (nothing).
Libertarian Party: (Formerly) An unofficial movement of philosphers and thinkers preoccupied with maximizing individual liberty and minimizing government interference in personal lives. (Currently) Republicans who love guns and don’t go to church. Value: ENORMOUS appeal to selfish teenagers and CEOs who desperately want to believe that society has no value, but selfishness is a virtue.
-
Whew! That was fun!
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 19, 2006 11:19 AM | Link to this
According to Randy, I guess I’m pretty much screwed!
By lozen
April 19, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this
bunny farts!!! Ha, ha, ha! 72John, the evil done in the name of religion would fill several books the size of the bible.
By Jack
April 19, 2006 11:24 AM | Link to this
Julia you are the finest example of a Christian that I have seen on this blog. :)
By lozen
April 19, 2006 11:29 AM | Link to this
Brian at 11:18am, thundering applause. Hear, hear!
By Chilao
April 19, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this
fun as well to read, Brian Curtis. LMAO
By GOB
April 19, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this
Randy - Doesn’t your post about the belief and non-belief and potential consequences totally discount the idea of grace? Isn’t that what the new testament is really all about? It is about god’s grace for all of the sinners of the world. If it is acknowledged that everyone is a sinner, then isn’t god’s grace given to all of us, regardless of what we believe? If I, as a human, was created in a manner that gives me no other option than to be a sinner, then regardless of my sin (even total disbelief) would still be covered by grace.
By GOB
April 19, 2006 11:37 AM | Link to this
Julia - I wasnt talking about specific events, but those would certianly be included. I was talking about more generally, how religion has been the cause of most wars and that the world has ever seen. It has also been used to justify pretty much any horrible thing that man has ever done.
By Julia
April 19, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this
It has also been used to justify pretty much any horrible thing that man has ever done.
GOB-that’s a huge statement. Can you explain it?
Going to lunch. Will catch up after 1pm.
Thanks Jack. I hope you’re here when I get back from lunch. You’re the best!
By RF
April 19, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this
everything you want you can see but can’t have.
OH MY GOD- I’m in hell NOW!!!!
I think that what we have here is a failure to communicate.
Quick Mara, do you know what movie that’s from?? EASY
By Chilao
April 19, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this
I had a now deceased uncle that was an engineer for a big engineering firm(Borg-Warner), made industrial pumps, and he had quite a few buds at JPL(Jet Propulsion Laboratory), on his level, engineering-wise(distinct breed there…LOL)
he and some of them had a theory that heaven was on the other side of one of those black holes and had some interesting ‘data’ to back it up, well at least back up there being a parallel universe over there, which they translated as heaven.
By RF
April 19, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this
I second Brian’s answer in the 11:18. He summed it all up quicker than Net! LOVED the political party descriptions!
By Just Being Me
April 19, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this
Archie, thanks dude ;-) But, that’s Apostolic/Pentecostal…. not just Pentecostal.
chuck - seriously? you ain’t a christian if you haven’t been “born again”? Man, the Pope’s gonna be p* about this!! LOL! In other words, unless one believe the same way you, chuck, believes…you ain’t christian. got it.*
Although Catholics consider themselves to be Christians (and many non-Christians consider Catholics to be Christians), most Christians do not believe that Catholics are Christian. This is not unlike Jehovah’s Witnesses. JW’s don’t consider themselves to be Christians, and neither do Christians; but non-Christians consider JWs to be Christian.
At the risk of digressing ever-so-slightly, I must point out that as with all religious values and beliefs, it is a matter of belief and faith.
I guess chuck’s comment would have been better received if he started with “I believe” that only those who are born again are true Christians because I believe in the Bible and that’s what it says. But he definitely wasn’t saying (or at least I don’t think he was) that you have to believe in what chuck believes in to call yourself Christian. He’s saying something more along the lines of I believe in the truth of the Bible, and based on my belief, only those who are born again are Christians.
By Chilao
April 19, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this
That’s also a good GN&R song. well, starts off with the guy.
not answering, Mara young enough she may not get it. LOL
By lozen
April 19, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this
Just a little note in answer to what one loses by living in the illusion and hallucinations of religion: What can be a greater good than truth? What could help the human race to grow up and take responsibility for ourselves more than to stop waiting and praying for god to solve all our problems? Hallucination and illusions aren’t useful for anything, esp. scientific investigation. I believe true morality has to be based entirely in the real world. Morality is a social necessity, and the moment faith in a god ceases, we become socially conscious because we look at human beings as we are. Religious belief has prevented the growth of a sense of realism in human beings. In my opinion, religion doesn’t help anyone to see or work on changing the real moral issues in this world.
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 19, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this
Quick Mara, do you know what movie that’s from?? EASY
Major Payne and Cool Hand Luke. Hope I didn’t step on your toes Mara :)
By Monica
April 19, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this
GOB, you have me on that one - who made God? A difficult concept that God has always been. For me, eterninity is also a difficult concept. My mind can’t fathom the idea that there is no beginning or end.
As for God’s grace, that’s true if we accept it. If one chooses not to accept God, then he or she will not be saved by His grace.
Lozen, with regard to your comments on whether or not Hell exists, I saw this on a bumper sticker one time. It rationalizes why some claim to be Christians:
“Religion is insurance in this world against fire in the next, for which honesty is the best policy.”
By lozen
April 19, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
“At every crossway on the road that leads to the future, each progressive spirit is opposed by a thousand men appointed to guard the past… The least that the most timid among us can do is not to add to the immense dead weight which nature drags along.” MAETERLINCK: Our Social Duty
By Monica
April 19, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this
RF,
Ever played Team Trivia? One night we won because we knew the movie that the line “I bet I could eat 50 of these” came from. Cool Hand Luke is a great flick! Think we could work that one into the English curriculum?
By Archie
April 19, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this
Mara when I say criticism I am talking about finding fault and evaluating sometimes without finding fault. For example a co-worker of mine told me a story and why she did not trust certain people and I told her that she was paranoid. I basically criticized her way of thinking on that issue. I have since found out that this person really is paranoid way beyond my little comment. Anyway,Mara you are correct we did have a failure to communicate and that’s what goes on in many male-female relationships and I am trying to go back to topic no fault divorces should not be curtailed because sometimes there is no fault just a miscommunicated idea that’s beyond repair. I must say that in talking to women I definitely realize that the “grass ain’t greener over there”. I will not leave my spouse for someone else. In the pool example I used I did comment to the young lady she was taking the wrong shot and as she saw I did know what I was doing she quickly adapted. There are plenty of pleasant women at work,church, and at the bar. I am surprised that feminists do not bash people like Marion Brooks but then since I am not a woman I don’t know. Blog slap me if I need to move from Brooks-Campbell.
By lozen
April 19, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this
My father believed in god because of the wonderful, beautiful things in the world. He said, “How can you look at that sunset, that bird, that flower and not believe in god?” So tell me Randy, why did he die crying, “Why can’t I see god? god, why won’t you show me your face?”
By Jack
April 19, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this
You got to get your mind right.
By Jack
April 19, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this
“Aunt Bea, CALL THE MAN!”
By Just Being Me
April 19, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this
Renee,
Wouldn’t a better message be, join us, we are about love, and peace and spreading the gospel. Or something similar to that.
Perhaps. But, the even better message would be: follow Christ. He is about sharing love, peace, encouragement, enlightenment, uplifting, joy…
I think you hit on something, there. A significant problem with many christians today is that their message has changed from “follow Christ” to “join us” or even worse, “follow me.” Christians have SO lost sight of what it means to follow Christ, what it means to be christian. As you know, this is why I refuse to identify with christianity or christians. They have, without the help of non-believers, consistently and repeatedly given themselves a bad name, and reinforced all the negative images non-believers have about christians.
The mission was supposed to be to bring souls, just as they are, to Christ… to embrace them as they are, love them, encourage them, uplift them, and bring them to Christ. Now, the mission is somewhere between to build the largest church, raise the most money, have the most impressive “missions” resume, and of course the most important, to convert the homos.
They seem to have forgotten that it isn’t their job to prove or convince others that God exists, Jesus is the way, yada yada yada.
They completely lost sight of the fact that there is order to God’s plan for them. That all things were to be done decently, and in order. They completely forgot that you’re supposed to love and embrace non-believers first, then guide them along the way in their walk as GOD not them begins to change that new convert.
Well, the problem with the “join us” message is that nobody wants to join them because they have major integrity issues, judgment issues, hate issues, and self-exaltation/arrogance issues. Nobody wants to join them because in 2006, we have access to a lot more information, we’re smarter, better educated… we question things. We don’t take them at face value or believe it because “Mom said it’s so,” or “the Bible says it so I believe it.”
I believe that Christ-followers have two missions on earth: (1) to worship their Creator, and (2) to spread the message of Christ, thus reuniting them with their Father. Everything else is for naught. We are here to be the personification of Christ the man, in the flesh.
But, it’s so much more exciting to condemn, isn’t it? To judge. To bash. It feels so much better to play God instead of acting like Christ. Real love doesn’t even let you hurt people intentionally.
Times have changed, and now that we are more educated and more prosperous, people are no longer desperate for a god to believe in. People no longer have blind faith.
Christians will never win if they maintain this course. They forgot what they were sent to do.
By RF
April 19, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this
Monica- woudln’t that be awesome?? I say if Of Mice and Men can be taught with all that language, Cool Hand Luke ought to be included too. I don’t think most of my kids would be able to stay awake long enough, but they’d love the egg scene I bet!!
How about The Breakfast Club? I could teach the neatest unit with that if it weren’t for the language!
By Archie
April 19, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this
Brian Curtis I normally agree with your posts but sometimes…
“Democratic Party: A spineless organization of Republican wanna-bes who’ve lost touch with the working class’s needs and values, but don’t dare rediscover them for fear of offending campaign contributors. Value: A reminder of what weak principles not backed by strong action can accomplish (nothing).”
Brian I agree with that but you really should criticize those of us that vote and don’t vote, harder. You did good with that paragraph though.
Brian I don’t agree with your view on marriage because I think Chuck did a good job explaining the benefits earlier. As for the church I think you’re being too hard because a lot of churches at least in my area do a lot of good work. Admittedly I question how much good they are doing with all the drugs and crime in certain areas but the people are doing something which is better than nothing. Yes, I know some people that don’t attend church that do good things. The rest of your post is fine with me but hey we don’t have to agree on everything anyway. Good job.
By The72John
April 19, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this
GOB-that’s a huge statement. Can you explain it?
GOB, sorry if I’m intruding on your thunder here, but I can’t resist.
Julia - you seem to be a nice person, but please tell me you aren’t that naive? Religion was used to justify slavery, the conquering of the Americas and the slaughter of its native peoples, the feudal system and serfdom, the wars that plagued Europe from the mid-sixteenth to early eighteenth centuries, the Salem Witch Trials, 9-11, the IRA, the never-ending bloodshed of the Israelis and the Palestinians…
I could go on, but do I really have to? Religion may be responsible for some positives throughout history, but it is soaked in blood, persecution, hatred and bigotry.
By kimberly
April 19, 2006 12:32 PM | Link to this
I think I’m in love with Brian Curtis.
By Ken
April 19, 2006 12:41 PM | Link to this
John… The list was provided as a rebuttal to a previous post. As for your response, those evil things have been done throughout the ages with or without the influence of religion.
By chuck
April 19, 2006 12:43 PM | Link to this
The societal value of the democratic party is nil as far as I can see. Many call them Republican light, but I don’t think that is an accurate description. At least the Republican party does have ideas about policy. It seems that the dems only policy is “BLAME BUSH”, which unfortunately he makes all too easy to do.
Before the Republicans achieved a majority in both houses and won the presidency, I thought most Republicans were true believers. I thought they had values that were different from the Democrats. I have discovered that that is not necessarily true. Unfortunately, instead of getting into power and fixing what damage had been done by the dems, they followed many of the same practices. They spend too much money, they haven’t fixed our convoluted tax system, and they spend all of their time worrying about re-election rather than solving problems. The only real value of keeping them around rather than the dems is the one area in which they actually listen to their constituents…federal judges and Supreme Court justices.
By Chilao
April 19, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this
don’t forget The Crusades. LOL I know you not attempting to list EVERYTHING(are these form boxes long enough?) but they (Crusades) are relevant to today’s perception of the west.
“We’re on a Crusade“…LOL. spoken by someone who did not pay attention in history class, since a worse word probably could not have been chosen.
By Jack
April 19, 2006 12:47 PM | Link to this
Sobbing….
By Mara
April 19, 2006 12:54 PM | Link to this
Dang. Step out for a minute and look at what I miss LOL!!
“Failure to communicate”…
RF - I’m not so good at movies so I woulld’ve been stumped by this one. I did know if from GnR. Chilao beat me to it though :^)
Brian - I don’t think any self-respecting Democrat wants to be a Republican. Democrats are far too attached to the ideas of personal freedom, social justice and the regulation of business to ever subscribe to the Republican platform. Of course, this doesn’t describe the Democratic leaders, just the ordinary grass-roots Democrat…
By lozen
April 19, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this
Back off Kimberly! I put in my bid on Brian a long time ago! ;-) I think we’re both out of luck on this one.
One thing I’ve learned from studying religion: Christian theologians reverted to the flat-earth view even after there was much proof of the fact that the earth was spherical. The Christians, used the Bible as a science book, and the Bible most definitely portrays the earth as flat. They had no excuse, because the truth had been in for many centuries. This is what happens when a dogmatic religion gains political power. The Christians suppressed and persecuted genuine scientific inquiry for over fifteen centuries, and many powerful Christians and Christian groups continue to thwart scientific progress today. This is willful and malicious disregard for truth.
By The72John
April 19, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this
As for your response, those evil things have been done throughout the ages with or without the influence of religion
That’s a cop-out and you know it. You can’t say that with any surety. What CAN be said with surety is that these things DID happen, and religion WAS a primary driver.
Would scientists have been executed as heretics without religion creating the very concept of heresy?
I’m sick of hearing “my church does so and so”. Well, guess what - other groups do good works to, groups that have nothing to do with religion. Why, the peace corps manages to go into third world countries and assist people without destroying a single indigenous culture! Imagine that.
Religion creates Chucks and Randys. People who use it as a crutch to justify their own limited minds and base emotions. It’s a cancer.
By Monica
April 19, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this
RF, The Breakfast Club is an all time favorite! It’s right up there with Ferris Bueller and Sixteen Candles. Are you a child of the 70’s/80’s too? We had great music and great movies, which is a nice counter to our horrible sense of fashion and hairstyle - who ever came up with neon pink sweatshirts and blue eyeshadow?
By chuck
April 19, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this
You are welcome Julia. As for Catholics and Christianity, just as with EVERY denomination, it doesn’t matter what you SAY. It only matters what you do with Jesus. Here is an analogy to explain my earlier comments on being “Born Again”.
I can SAY that I am a Smith. I wasn’t born a Smith. I wasn’t adopted by anyone named Smith. I didn’t marry into the Smith family. SAYING that I am a Smith doesn’t make me a Smith.
Saying that we are “Christians” does not make it so. The Bible says that when we accept Jesus as Savior and Lord, we are ADOPTED as children of God. We become a part of His family. It is the PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP with Christ that makes us Christian NOT just VERBAL identification.
That said, I think that MANY Catholics HAVE accepted Christ and are therefore Christians. Except for Doctrinal Issues, it really doesn’t matter what church you belong to. I know a lot of Baptists who are not Christians…other denominations as well. What does matter is whether or not you belong to the FAMILY OF GOD.
By Susie
April 19, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this
Justin, I know this is about a million posts since you posted to me yesterday, but your ex is the one who is going to pay the price for what she’s doing to the kids. I know it’s hard to watch, but I promise you that one day the kids will know what she is doing to them, and they’ll resent her for it. If she’s trying to poison them against you, they’ll see through it. Kids aren’t stupid, I know of a 9 year old boy who sees through what his dad is doing already to try to bias him against his mom.
Just know that one day they’ll see what she’s done and she’ll get what’s coming to her.
By kimberly
April 19, 2006 01:06 PM | Link to this
Thanks Mara! As a democrat, I can say that we are indeed disappointed with the spinelessness of many of our “leaders.” That doesn’t mean we’ve abandonded our principles. Spare me the spin machine, Neocons. Our government is doing evil in OUR name, and YOU are complicit. Blood is on your hands, we owe China hundreds of billions of dollars, our legislative bodies are influenced almost entirely by paid lobbyists and rich f—-ers like Bernie Marcus, thus effectively nullifying anything even remotely “democratic” about our government. A few poor, lonely voices in the wilderness are all that represent the disadvantaged among us anymore, and “freedom” is a concept disappearing faster than trees in Georgia, which are disappearing pretty darned fast.
Save your crocodile tears, you big flirt, and meet me under the bridge in 20 minutes. {;->
By Just Being Me
April 19, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this
Susie NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!
By Jack
April 19, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this
Oh the music we could make!
By The72John
April 19, 2006 01:22 PM | Link to this
Oh look. Chuck once again claims to be the authority on what defines a “true” Christian. Well, I’m sure he must be different from all of the people throughout all of the centuries of Christianity who have claimed to have exactly that information.
We should feel so blessed, everyone! Forget all those other myriad belief systems, sects, denominations, philosophies and movements. Chuck’s figured it out! It’s all set! He knows exactly what should be going on!
Of course, all those OTHER people were just as SURE that THEY knew exactly what was going on, too. Hmm…wait…maybe…maybe I’m wrong. Maybe Chuck DOESN’T have the absolute lock on truth…maybe…maybe he’s just another delusional, narrow-minded fanatic…maybe he’s just another “special” person who’s convinced himself that he’s one of the chosen few…
gasp! No, that can’t be right…can it?
By Monica
April 19, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this
Kimberly & Mara, have you seen Syriana? Talk about disturbing! It doesn’t paint a nice picture of American government. It made me want to watch C-Span, which is a scary thought.
By RF
April 19, 2006 01:35 PM | Link to this
They spend too much money, they haven’t fixed our convoluted tax system, and they spend all of their time worrying about re-election rather than solving problems.
That pretty much sums up federal policy since ohhhhh, about 1965, wouldn’t you say?
Monica- I just about DIE when I look back at the fashions we had. Who actually decided that that stupid little alligator all over our clothes made us cool? And the tight jeans!!! I was soooooo skinny and looked just about ridiculous in them!!LOLOL
JBM- too often the message is “follow US or you’re WRONG and going straight to HELL!!” It’s a message of fear and conversion to avoid eternal punishment. Not a very positive image, if you ask me.
Somebody find the fan! Kimberly’s getting Jack all hot and bothered under that bridge!! Does the bridge have a cold shower??
By Jack
April 19, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this
Didn’t Cortez call the Mayans pagans and throught the ruse of religion take their gold and desimate their people?(It’s been a long time since I’ve been in school)
By Renee
April 19, 2006 01:40 PM | Link to this
Monica I have to TOTALLY agree with your 1:03. Those are the best!!! The 80’s were the best IMO.
By kimberly
April 19, 2006 01:43 PM | Link to this
Hey Monica, I watch a lot of C-Span. Check out Congress sometime. Heh heh… Nice bunch of arrogant pr—ks. The up side is that when neocon propaganda pushers try to ‘splain stuff to me, I can say, “Oh really?” and ‘splain to them what actually happened or what was actually said, ‘cause I saw it with my own eyes & ears. Truth isn’t always pretty, but knowledge is power.
Once more with feeling: TRUTH is completely independent of your political or religious beliefs. What really actually happened is something you should know before turning on your special interpretive filters.
By Renee
April 19, 2006 01:44 PM | Link to this
JBM. Ummmm…somebody get her the Tiara, excellent post…!!
By GOB
April 19, 2006 01:47 PM | Link to this
As for God’s grace, that’s true if we accept it. If one chooses not to accept God, then he or she will not be saved by His grace.
If god made humans unable to avoid sin, and if all sins are equal in the eyes of god, then not believing is no different that stealing. Theoretically, it does not matter at all what your actions or beliefs are. God’s grace is not just for those who are trying to do the right thing. Didnt Jesus die for ALL the sins of EVERYONE? If so, then someone who doesnt believe would have been forgiven of their sin as well, and be able to receive god’s grace. If this idea is wrong, then god has effectively condemned millions of people to hell simply for using the tools (logic, reason, curiousity, etc) that we were given.
By Julia
April 19, 2006 01:47 PM | Link to this
Monica-I’m right there with you on the 70’s/80’s thing! My fave singer was Rick Springfield whom I’ve met several times. He’s back on General Hospital by the way.
Chuck-if you’d like to email me then mu email is: signsbyroscoe@yahoo.com
I’d like to share some info with you that would probably bore the other bloggers. If you have time that is.
Anyone else can email me as well.
By GOB
April 19, 2006 01:51 PM | Link to this
Jack - Aztecs, not Mayans…
By Mara
April 19, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this
No, Monica, I haven’t seen it. I’ve read the reviews though, and I gotta say “WOW!!” This movie really offends the uber-nationalist Republicans doesn’t it!?
By Randy
April 19, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this
Lozen, from you 12:15 post. I don’t recall that God would show his face to people on this earth, from the bible. I haven’t see anyone crying on their death bed, however, I have seen and heard of people who went to heaven “shouting”. Where their souls couldn’t wait to get out of this earthly body and go to heaven. Happends alot.
On Brian Curtis, calling Christians “smug and arrogant” WOW. talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
By chuck
April 19, 2006 01:58 PM | Link to this
Gob, your initial statement is incorrect so the rest of your statement/question is logically flawed. When God created man, he made him with free will. Man CHOSE to disobey God. That disobedience and sin nature that came through it was passed on to all future generations. The Bible does teach that Jesus died for the sis of all, but His sacrifice was a FREE gift. In order for that gift to belong to you, you have to accept it. That is why it makes sense when the Bible says “het that HATH THE SON HATH LIFE. HE THAT HATH NOT THE SON HATH NOT LIFE.
By RF
April 19, 2006 02:04 PM | Link to this
Julia- don’t talk to strangers, baby don’t you taaaalllk I actually have that song on CD. How well I recall driving around in mom’s land yacht listening to it… Goodness, is it just me, or is Memory Lane turning into a historical drive!!LOL
Once more with feeling: TRUTH is completely independent of your political or religious beliefs. What really actually happened is something you should know before turning on your special interpretive filters. Standing and Applauding
Excellent comment kimberly. I’m going to print that one for future reference!!
By RF
April 19, 2006 02:06 PM | Link to this
Geez, I forgot how much you spit when you try to read the King James Bible. No wonder the preacher had to be several feet away and above us!! LOL
By Mara
April 19, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this
Monica, Kimberly - I watch a lot of c-span also! My fave is Washington Journal (I secretly lust after Brian Lamb…rrrroooowwwww! LOL!) And I agree that it is a handy dandy tool for fighting the Fox News spin. It’s hysterically funny when conservatives call into the Journal spouting the RNC talking points of “Democrats have NO ideas!” to a guest who was invited on specifically to discuss policy differences between proposals by Dems and Reps. It’s so funny! You can almost hear the foam flying off their lips as they speak. LMAO!!
By lozen
April 19, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this
Bless your little heart Randy. Brian is not smug and arrogant. What do you think of this:
“In addition to a ‘yes’ and a ‘no,’ the universe contains a ‘maybe.’” — Physicist David Finkelstein
By Mara
April 19, 2006 02:10 PM | Link to this
chuck, is God omnipotent?
By GOB
April 19, 2006 02:10 PM | Link to this
Chuck - To simplify: I was not given the choice to be a sin free person. If all sin is equal, then my sin of disbelief is no different than any sin you commit. Therefore, god’s grace would apply to me as well.
If you believe that no one can recieve god’s grace without accepting Jesus, are those people in Africa or South America that have never been exposed to christianity going to hell? I mean they did worship other gods and certainly were not born again, so by your logic, there are burning in hell right now.
By Monica
April 19, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this
GOB, Christ did die for the sins of all. However, you have to ask for forgiveness of your sins. If you ask for forgiveness, then you have to believe in God. If you don’t believe, then the argument is moot anyway.
God gave us logic, curiosity and reason because He wanted us to make a conscious choice to choose Him. It’s a bad analogy, but let’s say that a man is the only man on an island of 50 women (this is a hypothetical Jack!). He is the only man left. He can have his pick of the 50 women. Of course he would be happy with his pick, but wouldn’t it be nice for him to know that the woman is with him because she wants to, and not just because he is the only option? I think that God gave us the ability to reason and question because He wants us to choose Him.
By Jack
April 19, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this
No Mara. I think he could get it up if necessary. LOL
GOB. Thanks for the correction.
By chuck
April 19, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this
So Kimberly, do you think journalists turn off those filters BEFORE reporting “what really happened”? Based on your posts, do you think YOU DO THAT? The problem with your statement is that you and I and everyone else on here have those filters PERMANENTLY in place. They are part of who we are. When it comes down to it, you are no more or less biased than anyone else in your views.
Monica, just so you know…Syriana was FICTION. Worse than that, it was fiction done by George Clooney. No chance that that movie had a biased slant I’m sure.
By Randy
April 19, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this
Lozen, There are no maybe’s, there is a creator or there isn’t. Jesus rose from the grave or he didn’t(only 500 witnesses here, takes one witness to convict you of murder) Things are really black and white, when it comes down to it.
By The72John
April 19, 2006 02:21 PM | Link to this
In order for that gift to belong to you, you have to accept it
Agnus Dei, qui tolis peccata mundi
By Brian Curtis
April 19, 2006 02:24 PM | Link to this
Archie: Fair enough; I did skip over the problem of nonvoters. Good point!
As for churches, I DID acknowledge that religion can inspire people to do good things… just that it doesn’t happen often enough, and seems to promote an unthinking arrogance along with it. As evidenced by some of the posters here, as well as fundamentalists in general.
As for marriage? I still don’t know if it comes down on the plus or minus side, societal-value wise.
—
Mara: You’re correct too. It’s true that no ‘self-respecting’ Democrat wants to be a Republican. Unfortunately, the LEADERS of the Democratic Party apparently have no self-respect.
—
Randy: I didn’t call “Christians” smug and arrogant… just you.
By The72John
April 19, 2006 02:25 PM | Link to this
The Passion of the Christ was FICTION. Worse than that, it was fiction done by Mel Gibson. No chance that that movie had a biased slant I’m sure.
Fixed.
By Randy
April 19, 2006 02:26 PM | Link to this
Great post Monica, free will. Necessary, or there would be no point to being here on this earth. I’m a optomist, I think most people will see the light before they die, it’s a shame they can’t know it earlier. They will look back and say “how could I have been so blind”.
By GOB
April 19, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this
Monica - I guess where we diverge is it seems to me that if God is really all-knowing and all-powerful, then how loving can he really be if he allows millions of people to burn in hell for all eternity just because they didnt pick him? He knows many will have other religions, not believe at all, or possibly never be exposed to Jesus.
A really good book on this topic is “Between Noon and Three.” I strongly recommend it. It is written by a christian, from a christian perspective and is very thoughtful on the subject of grace.
By Jack
April 19, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this
The leaders of the Democratic Party have no self respect or balls.
By Renee
April 19, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this
Okay God has so much everlasting love for us that he gave his only begotten Son. He loves each and every one of us, no matter our sin etc…BUT he doesn’t love us enough to GIVE us heaven or everlasting life. His love is conditional upon making the CHOICE to choose him or he will burn us eternally.
Something about this “love story” is not that endearing.
By lozen
April 19, 2006 02:30 PM | Link to this
Black-or-white thinking abounds in popular thought: “Either you love your country or you hate it.” “He who is not with me is against me.” “If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.” Carl Sagan suggests: “Spin more than one hypothesis … think of all the different ways in which it could be explained. Then think of tests you could use to disprove each of the alternatives. What survives, the hypothesis that resists disproof …among ‘multiple working hypotheses,’ has a much better chance of being the right answer than if you had simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.”
By Mara
April 19, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this
Randy, thousands say they have witnessed UFOs…does that mean you believe they exist too? Hundreds of Nepalese swear they’ve seen a Yeti. Millions of people believe that ghosts exist, how about you? If all it takes is a few witnesses to prove something….
JACK!!!! ROTFLMFAO! you naughty, naughty thing you! I bet he could get it up if he had to, too!
By chuck
April 19, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this
Gob, I have had many discussions on this topic before. Rather than bore everybody else with the discussion, I’ll just point you to Romans 1:20 which says:
For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
If you want a further explanation, the Matthew Henry Commentary on this verse can be found at:
http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/MatthewHenryComplete/mhc-com.cgi?book=ro&chapter=1#Ro1_21
By lozen
April 19, 2006 02:41 PM | Link to this
Renee, I’ll remember this line too. “Something about this love story is not that endearing.” Let’s just imagine a typical teenager, “Mom, that is not true. I used to believe you knew everything. Now I see you don’t know everything and I don’t believe you anymore.” “Okay, sweet son, I love you but you have chosen not to believe in me and for that choice, you will go to hell and burn forever.”
By kimberly
April 19, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this
Whoa… thanks for the applause. Just trying to help with perspective. That Chuckie jumped on it is validation enough! {;->
Chuckie, most “journalists” today are whores, but that’s my opinion based on (1) my observations, and (2) what I was taught in journalism school about objective reporting and the importance of a free press in maintaining a free and democratic society. (Fe11ating the people in power is not supposed to be the function of the press. That’s what their interns are for. Hahaha!) No one is 100% unbiased, but an AWFUL lot of people, simply don’t know what the F%^# they’re talking about!
By Mara
April 19, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this
GOB - even worse than him allowing “millions of people to burn in hell for all eternity just because they didnt pick him” is that as an entity who knows everything that is, was, or shall ever be…he continues to create souls that he knows will not choose to follow him. Which brings up “free will”. Is it really free will if God already knows what you’re going to do? Sure, you could choose this way or that way, but so what? God already knew which way you’d go…
Brian, Jack - you are correct. No cajones, no spine, no self-respect.
By Monica
April 19, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this
Chuck, I am well aware that Syriana was fiction.
GOB, I’ll check out that book.
Renee, I have to admit that you bring up a good point. I euquate it to a parent whose child has gone astray. Parents love their children even when they make bad choices. Parents love their children even when children turn their backs on them. Those same parents allow their children to suffer the consequences of their wrong choices. Julia, JBM, some help on this one?
By Mike
April 19, 2006 02:49 PM | Link to this
Diane -
Your last two paragraphs were persuasive - those two paragraphs alone would have sufficed.
Your first four paragraphs were mostly irrelevant and mean spirited.
Your rebuttal would have been better without filling 2/3 of it with gratituous bashing of Christians and conservatives.
By GOB
April 19, 2006 02:52 PM | Link to this
Chuck - What happens to those who through no fault of their own are never exposed to Jesus? Do they go to hell, or is there some sort of sign up sheet they get before god decides?
By chuck
April 19, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this
Republicans are not perfect ‘tis true
the party they’ve selected
has one thing that the other lacks
they’re always re-elected.
By lozen
April 19, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this
Randy, the witnesses the bible says were there cannot be interviewed, unfortunately. You remind me of that old, old fallacy, begging the question:
Is there a God? Yes. How do you know? Because the Bible says so. How do you know the Bible is correct? Because it was inspired by God.
In this fallacy, the premise, the Bible’s statement that God exists, derives its authority from the attempted conclusion, the existence of the God who allegedly wrote the Bible. Bless your heart!
By RF
April 19, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this
*His love is conditional upon making the CHOICE to choose him or he will burn us eternally.
Something about this “love story” is not that endearing.*
Renee: Change the his and him to her and you’ve got Justin’s ex summed up perfectly. Remarkable parallels between her and some people’s version of God. Hmmmmmm.
By GOB
April 19, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this
Parents love their children even when children turn their backs on them. Those same parents allow their children to suffer the consequences of their wrong choices.
I don’t know too many parents that would stand by and let their children die and then be punished for all of eternity because of a wrong choice. Doesn’t real love necessitate stepping in at some point?
By Randy
April 19, 2006 03:13 PM | Link to this
Lozen, I don’t believe in God because the bible says so. I believe in GOD because it is logical and reasonable and I have had a life changing expericence. You will fight tooth and nail not to believe! How many more books disputing Jesus do you need to read, not to believe???
By RF
April 19, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this
If all it takes is a few witnesses to prove something…
Mara- those witnesses tell a story, which gets passed around and down through the generations, and one day about a thousand years later, someone decides to write it down and make it official. Hmmmmmm, I wonder how much we really should believe it…
By Renee
April 19, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this
LOL RF.
Monica my response would be similar to GOB. I love my daughter unconditionally and I can’t even express the amount of love which I have for her. That being said, if she goes against everything I taught her, and became a crack-addict/prostitute, stole from me to support her habit, and anything else bad, I would NOT turn my back on her. Maybe I would ask for outside intervention. Maybe she couldn’t live in my house, maybe I wouldn’t give her any money, but I wouldn’t sentence her to a life of having a car run over her once a minute (assuming that was legal). That seems pretty similar to this very CONDITIONAL love that God has.
He says he loves everyone. Not tolerate, but love. So do you love the Christians more, since they have heaven to look for. And how is questioning his existence abandoning him. God doesn’t want any fools in heaven, so since he gave the intelligence and reasoning to question the very existence which is claimed by him, why shouldn’t we.
Some Christians don’t even know why they believe. It’s like this blind following. They go through the motions, praying daily, tongue speaking, oil or whatever, and if you ASK them how do you know God exists, they will tell you, he just does. I have faith, I believe.
And another thing, why would God have us endure a life of Hell basically to look forward to heaven when we die??? If he loves me, can I get my heaven now????
By Justin
April 19, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this
I can understand the unconditional love God has for us. To truly understand unconditional love, one must become a parent.
Susie, I pray the children see her ways. I also pray she won’t scar them so they won’t have a good relationship. One thing I never do is let them know how upset I am with her. They have enough to contend with on her side.
RF, what can I say…I long for the day when I no longer have to communicate with her.
By Mara
April 19, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this
lozen are you really standing there fists, eyes, and teeth clenched fighting this overwhelming urge to believe that the whole universe was magically created by a big ol’ invisible spankin’ daddy in the sky?! (snicker…)
By Randy
April 19, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
GOB, That’s an interesting point of view on stepping in at some point. However, are you willing to risk your eternal soul on that hunch?? Not me. That’s the whole key, I would prefer everyone go to heaven, do I hope I’m wrong and everyone goes to heaven “absolutely”. However, I’m not risking my eternal spirit or soul on the chance God accepts everyone and religion is a manipulation of the people(or whatever it is, that non-believers think). I like the sure thing and I see that what I believe is the truth(or it wouldn’t get so much attention, along with many other little validations).
By lozen
April 19, 2006 03:38 PM | Link to this
Randy, bless your heart. You really believe I haven’t had life changing experiences? Every time I read one of your posts I think of the bible:
Matthew7: Judge not, that ye be not judged. 2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. 3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? 4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? 5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.
By The72John
April 19, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this
I believe in GOD because it is logical and reasonable and I have had a life changing expericence. You will fight tooth and nail not to believe! How many more books disputing Jesus do you need to read, not to believe??
Others have had life changing experiences that led them to other religions. Or away from religion. They are as convinced of the veracity and authenticity of those experiences as you are.
And, just so you know, the book you are obsessed with harping on, based on how it was described, involves very real historical conflicts. You don’t REALLY think that the current understanding of Jesus was immediately reached, do you?
Just as ONE example, albeit a very important one in Church History, the Arian Heresy was a pervasive and popular philosophy in the early Church that disputed the idea of the Trinity. God was superior to Christ who was superior to the Holy Spirit. Ultimately, the conflict between Arias and his folowers and the Trinitarians led to Arias being declared a heretic at the Council of Nicea. That was in the fourth century, Randy…it was four hundred years before the idea of the Trinity was codified as Church doctrine.
There were others…was Christ the human distinct from Christ the divine? The Nestorians thought so. Was salvation achieved, not through belief, but through the reciept of some secret knowledge? Well, ask a Gnostic…
So you see, Randy, it’s not a matter of “I don’t believe it, so it didn’t happen”. It DID happen. Your religion has changed over and over and over and over again. There is NO ABSOLUTE TRUTH to be discovered from a document that has been re-written and re-imagined so many times that the number would make a mathematician wince. The protestant bible that I’m sure you swear by wasn’t even assembled until the Reformation!
If you were concerned about TRUTH, Randy, you wouldn’t be the blithely credulous simpleton that you are.
By GOB
April 19, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this
To truly understand unconditional love, one must become a parent.
Whatever…
By Mara
April 19, 2006 03:48 PM | Link to this
another bit of Queensryche to finish up the day -
Religion and sex are powerplays
manipulate the people for the money they pay
selling skin, selling god
the numbers look the same on your credit card
Y’all have a good evening, ya hear? Ta-ta (kiss, kiss)
By Chilao
April 19, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this
Randy is driving Lozen to religion? who knew? LMAO (Joking)
Let me guess, now you want to be this guy named Matthew? When’s the surgery?
By Julia
April 19, 2006 03:52 PM | Link to this
Wouldn’t it be interesting if the AJC stared a “Christian to Christian” blog? (Far fetched I know!)
Renee-And another thing, why would God have us endure a life of Hell basically to look forward to heaven when we die??? If he loves me, can I get my heaven now????
This world was heavenly until sin ruined it all. People have free will and make choices that makes earth seem like hell sometimes. (The rapists,murderers,etc…) You can’t blame the hellish earthly condition on God. people screwed it all up.
But we can go to a place called heaven when we leave this (hellish) earth if we ask Christ for forgiveness of our sins.
Not enough time to go into now but will try to go into more detail tomorrow. (I’ve had company in my office for most of the day so it’s been hard to blog. Tomorrow I’ll be free.)
By lozen
April 19, 2006 03:54 PM | Link to this
Mara, you know I am funny lady.
By lozen
April 19, 2006 04:03 PM | Link to this
Chileo, nobody is touching me with no knife! I can quote it with the best of em. Anyway, when did you see the Dead Sea Scrolls? In North Carolina? Is it really worth the trip? 72John we all might as well save our breath. You and I have been fighting not to believe “the whole universe was magically created by a big ol’ invisible spankin’ daddy in the sky?! (snicker…)” by reading the same books or taking the same religion courses I guess.
By GOB
April 19, 2006 04:04 PM | Link to this
Ahhh…Operation Mindcrime…That is good stuff. Heard Breaking The Silence on XM about an hour ago…
By kimberly
April 19, 2006 04:04 PM | Link to this
Here’s a quizzle for Jack. Can you name it?
“Heaven ain’t walkin’ the streets paved with gold; Hell ain’t a mountain of fire. Heaven is layin’ in my sweet baby’s arms; Hell is when baby ain’t there!”
Wow, I’m old enough to remember THAT one, but I was just a BABY, I tell you. A BABY!
By Julia
April 19, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this
I’m sure Jack will take a “quickie”. (Sorry Jack…couldn’t resist!)LOL
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 19, 2006 04:14 PM | Link to this
“Heaven ain’t walkin’ the streets paved with gold; Hell ain’t a mountain of fire. Heaven is layin’ in my sweet baby’s arms; Hell is when baby ain’t there!”
Heaven or Hell, Waylon Jennings
By RF
April 19, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this
This world was heavenly until sin ruined it all.
It’s not that bad, is it? To me, it’s kinda like plain vanilla ice cream. Not bad, but you’re really looking forward to the chocolate syrup, some nuts, a little whipped cream….can you tell I didn’t get much lunch??
a big ol’ invisible spankin’ daddy in the sky?! (snicker…) I ‘bout fell out of my chair, Mara!! The image was just too funny!!
Julia- here’s an easy one for you. “I play along with the charade….there doesn’t seem to be a reason to change….” Okay, Name That Tune!!
Gotta go- Kroger, Target, yadda, yadda. Have to get rabbit food. My wonderful father decided his grandsons needed a pet rabbit…of course he didn’t ask his son for an opinion, and now I’m stuck with another mouth to feed that won’t clean up it’s own mess!!! LOLOL Bye, y’all!!
By Julia
April 19, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this
Oops…thought you said quickie not quizzie (or quizzle)! Disregard that Jack.
By Chilao
April 19, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this
Lozen - Dead Sea Scrolls exhibit in Mobile, AL, February 2005, think the exhibit ran January to April. yes, was worth it to me, I am a history buff (obviously not religious. LOL) good exhibit, they had alphabet samples(A-Z, etc) of Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew and Latin alphabets next to each other, whole bunch of other stuff.
By Justin
April 19, 2006 04:24 PM | Link to this
Interesting articles…
“Desperate Feminist Wives” Does the Quest for Marital Equality Doom Marital Happiness? http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20060404_mcclain.html
Child support www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/16/grossman.child.support/index.html
By Netbanker
April 19, 2006 04:25 PM | Link to this
It’s been one heck of a day kids, but I wanted to say hey!
Dang legal clauses. You just don’t get as much for your buck these days. Well sheets aren’t exactly the place to looking to get more bang for your buck.
some men LIKE to be punished! True, but masochists do tend to be the minority. And does a spanking really count as punishment?
By kimberly
April 19, 2006 04:34 PM | Link to this
JaP: ding ding ding! Very good. From my brief country music period, back when it was good. From Wanted: The Oulaws. Still have it, but it won’t fit in my CD player!
By lozen
April 19, 2006 04:37 PM | Link to this
So, let’s see….god creats Adam and Eve (Genesis:And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them) free from sin and everything was heavenly. This is the first Genesis story of creation. But he told Adam that he must not eat from the tree of knowledge (And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.) This is from the second Genesis story of creation. Then Eve sinned by disobeying god (but he didn’t tell her not to eat; he only told Adam - the bible says so) and she convinced Adam to eat the fruit from the forbidden tree. In the day they ate they did not die! But heaven became hell. (Of course, god knew from the get go this was going to happen because he is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent.) Why in the world did he bother knowing that they would disobey and that humans forevermore would disobey and he would have to put millions and millions of humans in hell and watch them burn forever? Doesn’t that make Yahweh something of a sadist?
By kimberly
April 19, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this
NetB…. STOP IT! Heeheeheehee….
By Just Being Me
April 19, 2006 04:49 PM | Link to this
Dang, what an exciting day I missed! This is way too much for me to respond to, I’ll just jump back in tomorrow. Y’all have a great evening!
By lozen
April 19, 2006 04:49 PM | Link to this
Can some bible believer explain this to me:
Genesis 1/3.And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. Now skip on to Genesis 1/14 14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day [4] from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, [5] and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
Okay where did the first light he created come from if not from the sun? And why did he call the moon a light when it’s not a light? The moon reflects light from the sun.
Boy did that preacher woman get upset when she said, “the people who wrote the bible were so smart; they knew all about nature and how things work.” And I said, “no they didn’t” and quoted this. And she said, Maybe you’d be happier in some other class Lozen!
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 19, 2006 04:49 PM | Link to this
JaP: ding ding ding! Very good. From my brief country music period, back when it was good. From Wanted: The Oulaws. Still have it, but it won’t fit in my CD player!
Thanks Kimberly! Believe it or not, country music is all the rage in Israel especially Willie and The Judds!
By Chilao
April 19, 2006 04:57 PM | Link to this
he would have to put millions and millions of humans in hell and watch them burn forever?
I always wondered if there were other planets where a similiar Control-Freak experiment was done, and those people passed. I suggested once that travelers on UFOs might be from those planets, but I was assured that GoodFolk from those other planets would not stoop to visit our evil planet, so I could only assume any vistor from another planet was a similiar flunked the test type, like us. LOL
By lozen
April 19, 2006 04:58 PM | Link to this
I just wonder….
By Netbanker
April 19, 2006 06:13 PM | Link to this
His love is conditional upon making the CHOICE to choose him or he will burn us eternally. WOW! Renee you boiled that down to hard kernal of truth that I’m not sure I’ve ever really considered. You’re taught in church that God’s love is unconditional, but put into that simple context God’s love IS conditional. It’s Pick ME or suffer. Put in those terms God comes across as rather selfish and self-centered.
By RF
April 20, 2006 08:25 AM | Link to this
Well sheets aren’t exactly the place to looking to get more bang for your buck.
Trust me Net, since having children, there isn’t anything happening on or between the sheets!!LOL That, and my 8 yr.old is still having issues with sleeping in his own bed, sooooo the sheets aren’t all that important anyway!!—LOL And I wouldn’t trade lives with anyone!!
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 20, 2006 08:58 AM | Link to this
Will someone please, PLEASE! tell me what size the corn cobb (sp?) stuck up that mom’s a-s-s in Gwinnett County must be! Honestly, SHE thinks that Harry Potter promotes witchcraft so she wants to ban the series from all elementary school libraries! I swear this is just a stone’s throw away from rounding up all the Wiccans and burning them at the stake! Do we really want to return to the 17th century? What next? Should we ban The Sopranos because it “promotes” the mob? CSI because they “promote” homocide? Someone at that hearing today just needs to SMACK some sense into that woman.
By GOB
April 20, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this
Yeah, Harry Potter promotes witchcraft by having christmas as a major celebration in all the books.
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 09:12 AM | Link to this
speak of the Devil, last night after Fox’s BONES(anybody see the Catholic FBI agent Boothe state “Jesus was not a Zombie”, since the show was about voodoo in post-Katrina New Orleans), anyway, turn to PBS for back-drop for reading, and lo and behold the show is Holy Warriors, all about Saladin(who was a Kurd) and The Crusades, seems the first before him was a group of Franks who took Jerusalem and killed every living thing, and it was held for 88 years until Saladin came along and used religion to advance his own powers(LOL), after consolidating the Arab tribes.
Lozen - another very interesting thing about the Dead Sea Scrolls exhibit, it covered the life/times of the sect who had isolated themselves in the Dead Sea area, since they were holier than thou than those secular Jews down in the urban areas, who did not take the Lord seriously enough. I thought at the time “well, some things never change after all”. LOL There was also a thing on Masada, which was about 5 centuries later, but in the same general area.
By Brian Curtis
April 20, 2006 09:13 AM | Link to this
JAPOI: Basically, a lot of evangelicals just want to ban all fiction entirely, and have kids study nothing but the Bible.
By Renee
April 20, 2006 09:13 AM | Link to this
I think it’s a 6 foot corn cob LOL.
I had to go read the article after your post. How ridiculous. It should be removed because it goes against her beliefs. So now, the only books in the school library should conform to what she believes in.
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 09:16 AM | Link to this
cobb = a county in Georgia. cob = that thing after you eat corn that ends up misplaced in some people’s expulsion tracts. LOL
one can only wonder what they were doing to get it so misplaced(and stuck), but that a whole ‘nother Oprah LMAO
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 20, 2006 09:17 AM | Link to this
Thank you GOB. Another strike against the Holy Crusader. Not only is she judgemental but hypocritical as well.
By E. Lewis
April 20, 2006 09:19 AM | Link to this
How about requiring a waiting period to get married?
I don’t think divorce is so much the problem as is people who marry the wrong person in haste.
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 20, 2006 09:23 AM | Link to this
I’d be very interested to hear the opinions of the thumpers on the blog (Chuck, Randy, Zack et al) and also the avowed Christians who don’t promote hellfire and damnation for being who they are (JBM in particular).
By Renee
April 20, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this
If you marry the wrong person, that should be your problem, your mistake to fix. Happens all the time. The government should not be able to tell anyone when is a good time to marry who they want to marry.
By Ken
April 20, 2006 09:27 AM | Link to this
Lozen… I pondered your Genesis question(s) for quite some time and wanted to offer up these possible explanations for your own pondering.
Perhaps the first light is not the sun. Maybe it is a shapeless light that God created. Or it is the shining light from God’s own being. Or it is simply the idea that there would be day and night. Any of these would lend to the actual creation of what we call the sun. And who is to say that he didn’t create all of the other “suns” at the same time as ours. We do know of other universes and solar systems.
The moon was a light to the people of 7000 years ago. We must remember that humans wrote the story of Genesis and things are written in what they can comprehend. That does not mean that God did not create it.
Genesis 1:1 states that God created heaven and the earth. That word earth may not mean specifically our planet but simply the idea of planets and the heavens. He specifically names Earth in verse 10.
Again these are only suppositions that I do not know the truth to. How he did it cannot ever be written down. We have scientists who have spent their entire lives attempting to figure it out and writing thousands of pages to explain their findings. So why would we thing a page or two of scripture would provide the answers.
You see, I read that story and rather than attempting to pick it apart, I simply see it as the statement that God created everything.
By GOB
April 20, 2006 09:43 AM | Link to this
Perhaps the first light is not the sun. Maybe it is a shapeless light that God created. Or it is the shining light from God’s own being. Or it is simply the idea that there would be day and night. Any of these would lend to the actual creation of what we call the sun. And who is to say that he didn’t create all of the other “suns” at the same time as ours. We do know of other universes and solar systems.
The moon was a light to the people of 7000 years ago. We must remember that humans wrote the story of Genesis and things are written in what they can comprehend. That does not mean that God did not create it.
Arent these two statements somewhat contradictory? In the first you are trying to explain the passage in a way that would make it literally true, but then in the second, you are saying that since man wrote the bible so long ago, and didnt understand the relationship of the earth, sun and moon, that the text should be read from their perspective, and therefore cant be literally true.
Also, doesnt your second point take away some of the force behind the whole, it is the exact word of god argument? Surely god knew about the earth/moon/sun relationship, and would have given the writers the correct information…right?
By chuck
April 20, 2006 10:02 AM | Link to this
If you want to be nitpicky, the moon IS a light. If it was not there, there would be nothing to reflect the sun and there would be no light. A similarity exists with a lamp. It has to have ELECTRICITY or there is no light. So which is the light…the bulb or the electricity? It doesn’t really matter does it? We call the lamp a light because it is the source of the illumination that we see. The same is true of the moon. At night, it is the source of the illumination that we see.
By Netbanker
April 20, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this
RF…I don’t know that the sheets still aren’t important. Shouldn’t your 8yo be learning about the importance of quality sheets for future reference?
I wonder if the lady in Gwinnet also objects to “The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe?” While those books have christian ‘imagery’ they also contain witchcraft, spells, talking lions, beavers, wolves, etc (instead of a snake), and in my estimation due to the war more violence than H.P. books. If every book that offended a parent was removed from the library there would be no point in having a library since the shelves would be empty.
The more we discuss creation the more I feel like some intergalactic science project. When God says “Let there be light” then He must have known what light is whicn in turn means HE must be outside of the universe. That means that there IS something outside the universe. Which makes us like the Who’s in ‘Horton Hears a Who.’ So now we’re just this teeny-tiny little spec in the existence of everything. From that comparative perspective thinking that God is aware of and cares abot every individual’s daily mundane life and our own self-importance is outrageously overblown/out of proportion to our place in the grand existence of everything.
By lozen
April 20, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this
ken, ken, ken. I should have known someone would just use the old mumbo jumbo again. (Well, you have to interpret this this way but then with this statement you must interpret it just the opposite way!) If the bible is the inerrant word of god why is it so full of mistakes like this? Of course, you don’t pick it apart because you want to believe, or you’ve been taught to believe and never to question the idea that the bible is the inerrant world of god. I have a scientific bent and a “show me the proof” kind of mentality. Noone has ever shown me any proof that the bible is the inerrant word of some god; obviously it is not. It is full of mistakes about nature (calling a bat a bird - did god not know the bat is a mammal?), the heavens (the example I just gave), the nature of humanity (black and white, good or evil, and no in-between). Chuck can use it to support his hatred of homosexuality, white southerners could use it to justify slavery, men have used it to put down women and keep them from living full lives, parents have justified beating kids (spare the rod… bla, bla, bla). It is a book written thousands of years ago by a group of people trying to understand where they came from and what the meaning of life is. That’s all.
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 20, 2006 10:21 AM | Link to this
From that comparative perspective thinking that God is aware of and cares abot every individual’s daily mundane life and our own self-importance is outrageously overblown/out of proportion to our place in the grand existence of everything
To expound on that Net, what if there is life on other planets in the known and unknown universe? Does G-d exist for those beings and is he does here? Many religions believe that they;re followers are the chosen of G-d. What if the inhabitants of Planet C03B2 in some distant galaxy on the other side of the universe claim the same thing? Who’s right? I guess it’s just one more thing we take on faith.
By Monica
April 20, 2006 10:23 AM | Link to this
I’ve gone to church all my life and have never heard anyone use the Bible to justify slavery. How have “Christians” done that in the past?
By lozen
April 20, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this
Monica, you don’t think all those slave owning southerners were christians? Of course you’ve never heard anyone use it to justify slavery now because we don’t have slavery now!
By Tim
April 20, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this
Monica… pre-cival war
By Justin
April 20, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this
States that recognize common law marriage…
There wouldn’t be a waiting period in these states so that would be nil…
Alabama Colorado District of Columbia Georgia (if created before 1/1/97) Idaho (if created before 1/1/96) Iowa Kansas Montana New Hampshire (for inheritance purposes only) Ohio (if created before 10/10/91) Oklahoma Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina Texas Utah
By Mara
April 20, 2006 10:41 AM | Link to this
So chuck, regarding your lamp comparison…I’m assuming that you were comparing the lamp to the sun, right? With electricity substituting for the nucyaler fusion that causes the sun to produce light…right? Then where in that analogy is the “moon” concept?
By GOB
April 20, 2006 10:41 AM | Link to this
I’ve gone to church all my life and have never heard anyone use the Bible to justify slavery.
Well, it has fallen out of fashion in the past 100 years or so.
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 20, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this
Monica, read the works of Bishop John Hopkins, the Bishop of the Diocese of Vermont during the 1860’s, specifically the “Bible View of Slavery” written in 1863. I think it will help answer your question.
By Justin
April 20, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this
Monica, Slave owners in America used the story of Ham (Genesis 9:20–25), the son of Noah, to justify their enslavement of Africans and those of African descent.
By lozen
April 20, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this
There is no place in the bible where it says slavery is evil. So people can find words in the bible that they can interpret as “homosexuality is a sin”. But there is not one place in the bible where you can find “owning another human being” is a sin! There are references to how to treat your slaves and how slaves should treat their masters (many times the word used is “servant” but they were “slaves”). These were used to “prove” that god looked kindly upon slavery back before that “late great unpleasantness” of the 1860’s.
By chuck
April 20, 2006 10:50 AM | Link to this
Monica, Lozen is talking about the time period leading up to the Civil War. In fact, that isn’t the ONLY time that HUMANS have either without understanding, or through evil intent MISinterpreted the Bible for their own personal reasons. In the 70’s, preachers would take the following verse out of context:
1 Corinthians 11:14 (King James Version) King James Version (KJV) Public Domain
14Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
If that is ALL that you read, you would think that it is a sin for a man to have “long hair”. That is not true. The verse is referring to a man who has taken a “Nazarite Vow” (which entails leading a very specific life of purity and also includes not cutting the hair or beards) but not living the LIFE of a Nazarite. In other words giving the OUTWARD appearance of a life of purity while not living a life of purity.
I have tried to explain this concept a number of times, but Lozen, john and others either can’t or won’t grasp it. Taking verses out of context, you can USE the Bible to justify almost anything. Christianity does not USE the Bible, it STUDIES the Bible in CONTEXT and follows it. Studying the Bible inductively one does not make those mistakes.
By Justin
April 20, 2006 10:51 AM | Link to this
Actually, Genesis 9:20-27…
The Bible has often been mis-interpreted to justify the non-Christian behavior of those who use it to control others.
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 10:53 AM | Link to this
Monica - Slavery as an institution was against European Christian principles, serfdom may have been okay(fine-line), but not direct slavery. The justification was that since many Africans could not be converted to Christianity(being quite content with either Islam, which many were, or their animist religions), they obviously did not have a soul, and could therefore be enslaved.
the exception, within Africa, was Ethiopia, which had been very Christian since about the 3rd-4th century. Do you think it is merely coincidence that Ethiopians were never enslaved, period, or colonized, for that matter, until Mussolini arrived in the 1930s? The Jesuits went there in the mid 1600s but were quickly expelled and all Westerners were banned for 200 years. A strong Ethiopian central government a factor there as well.
But the unconvertible West Africans, most already Moslem or at least animist, were enslaved.
Of course the Spanish got around all this slavery issue by creating something called debt peonage where the indigenous peoples had to pay for the privilege of external salvation the Spanish Church had so graciously brought them, by working as essentially indentured servants to the Spanish the rest of their lives, after all, things would be Much Better in the new life, after death of course. SNORT
By lozen
April 20, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this
Oh Mara, ;-) I don’t think chuck will get that.
By Renee
April 20, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this
LOL Gob
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 20, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this
Monica, you don’t think all those slave owning southerners were christians?
Lozen, just playing devil’s advocate (ha ha), it’s a far stretch to say because southern christians owned slaves means that the Bible justifies it. I can’t say for sure but I don’t think the average slave owner was thinking “Hey, the Bible says it’s o.k. for me to own slaves so I’m gonna own me some slaves.” I think the average slave owner was thinking “Hey, I sure do have a lot of cotton that needs to be picked and boy howdy, them slaves are sure a cheap way of doing it.”
By Mara
April 20, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this
Monica, did a quick google for ya. here’s the website - http://www.law.uga.edu/academics/profiles/dwilkesmore/his29racism.html
short version:
Leviticus 25:44-46 regarding the buying, keeping, and inhereting slaves
Exodus 21:2-6 & Deuteronomy 15:16-17 relating to the slavery of poor hebrews
Genesis 9:26-27 the curse of Canaan
Ephesians 6:5-8 & Titus 2:9-10 exhorting slaves to be obedient to their master
Colossians 3:22-24 exhorts slaves to obey
By Monica
April 20, 2006 11:03 AM | Link to this
Wow, I’m really wishing that I had paid more attention in World history in high school! I think I’m going to sit in on the World History teacher’s class when I have planning!
GOB, to answer your questions as to why I believe… don’t have time this morning to answer, but will get back to you.
By lozen
April 20, 2006 11:04 AM | Link to this
“Taking verses out of context, you can USE the Bible to justify almost anything.” chuck, you certainly are the expert on this!
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this
eternal Salvation? (sorry, not external).
By lozen
April 20, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this
Let’s say you are right chuck. One must study the bible in it’s entirety to understand what it really says and not just take a passage or verse out of context. Well, how many christians really study the entire bible? Don’t most christians quote verses and read the psalms? So again, why would god give humans a book to tell you what he wants from you (a book that could determine whether you have a great afterlife in heaven or burn in hell for eternity) but make it so long and so contradictory that nobody can understand it anyway unless they go to bible college?
By Justin
April 20, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this
One thing I am growing weary of is the depiction of Christ as a European White male. In Revelations 1:14-15, it states his white like wool and his feet like brass burned in a furnace. Wool is thick and well brass burned is dark. Plus, look at the color of the people who live in the area of the world that is the Holy Land.
By Jack
April 20, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this
“the cent that you pay is too high priced and your living beyond all your means. The man in the suit has just bought a new car from the profit he’s made from your dreams.”
Mara who did this one? Chilao please refrain. (I know you know)
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this
The exception within South America was Brazil/Portuguese, who did keep slaves. The Spanish had slaves as well, don’t get me wrong there, but that was more on the Caribbean Islands, Cuba for example. The Spanish referred to their escaped slaves, who formed their own communities many times, as Maroons, a derogatory term they also used for escaped horses, in other words Mustangs.
I always liked the parts in Leviticus that detailed how and what kind of sexual liberties you could take with your young female slaves. LOL. Have always wanted to ask a Leviticus quoter over ‘abomination to lay with a man’ if his cute 13 year old daughter was for sale. I jest. sorta. LOL
anybody see the West Wing episode several years ago where Bartlett(Sheen) rattled off all the Leviticus laws we no longer follow? “My daughter has a Masters from Vasser, how much do you think I should ask the young man who wants to marry her, for her, monetarily? Should be a good price, wouldn’t you think?”.
By Just Being Me
April 20, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this
I’d be very interested to hear the opinions of the thumpers on the blog (Chuck, Randy, Zack et al) and also the avowed Christians who don’t promote hellfire and damnation for being who they are (JBM in particular).
On what subject are you interested in hearing my opinion, JAP?
(Oh, and for the record, I’m not a member of the “Christian” religion, and I don’t consider myself a part of the “christian” body. For clarity though, I do follow the teachings of Christ).
By GOB
April 20, 2006 11:19 AM | Link to this
One thing I am growing weary of is the depiction of Christ as a European White male. In Revelations 1:14-15, it states his white like wool and his feet like brass burned in a furnace. Wool is thick and well brass burned is dark. Plus, look at the color of the people who live in the area of the world that is the Holy Land.
Justin - Are you implying the Jesus didnt really look like a country singer from the 1970s? How dare you.
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 20, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this
Hey Jack that’s Low Spark of High-Heeled Boys by Traffic…
By RF
April 20, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this
Which makes us like the Who’s in ‘Horton Hears a Who.’
Even Dr.Seuss realizes we may not be the center of the universe!! Who knew a children’s writer could be so important to a societal debate?
Justin- the depictions of Jesus show yet another interpretation of the Bible done by man. Because most early European academics and artists were white, their renderings of Jesus reflected that so people could identify with him. Many today could never accept the fact that he probably looks like the guy down the street that owns the 7-11 store!!LOL
By lozen
April 20, 2006 11:27 AM | Link to this
Justin, you’re so right. Yeshua was a jew and not a white, blond European. He followed jewish law, broke some of the laws (he was a rebel) and taught a new way of religion centered more on love of god than the rules and regulations, and “an eye for an eye,” which is why he was feared and hated by the jewish priests of his time and why he was crucified (if any of that story is reality).
By Just Being Me
April 20, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this
Justin, I agree with you, but I would take the “white like wool” part out of your argument. White like wool doesn’t equate to thick (or nappy) like wool. White like wool means that his hair was the color of wool.
For example, if I say that her teeth were yellow like bananas, it doesn’t mean that they smelled like bananas or had the shape or texture of a banana. It simply means that the color of her teeth were yellow, like a banana.
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 20, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this
On what subject are you interested in hearing my opinion, JAP?
I was wondering what you thought about this mom in Gwinnett wanting to ban all the Harry Potter books from the libraries because SHE thinks it promotes witchcraft and offends her christian sensibilities.
By Netbanker
April 20, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this
JAP - probability alone would indicate that there is intelligent life on other planets. In order to determine which planet’s God is the ‘true’ god would require understanding their creation stories, etc. I’d find that absolutely fascinating! The creation stories of most religions pretty much follow the same frame work. So if theirs followed the same frame why wouldn’t we be able to believe that the same God created both planets? Oh right…because we’re busy slaughtering each other on our own planet over whose God is bigger and badder. If we can’t attain understanding that a sole creator has appeared to different peoples in a meaningful way on one planet there isn’t a chance that we’d ever accept the God created more than one planet full of people.
Sorry, but the Moon is definitely NOT a light. In the example with the lamp, electricity (i.e. energy) is converted by a bulb into different forms of energy that are visible (light) and invisible (heat). The sun’s energy event is nuclear fusion which results in the conversion of energy from atoms in a visible form (light) and invisible (heat) among others. The Moon does no such conversion therefore it is not a source of light. The moon is not completely dark when in the shadow of the Earth due to reflected light from the Earth. Comparing the moon to a mirror or polished surface next to a lamp would be more correct.
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this
The point about asking a Levitucus quoter about the sale of his daughter is making the point out that it seems social evolution negates some of that, selling your daughter, eating shellfish, or keeping slaves, as three examples, but somehow the ‘lay with the man’ thing is still to be rigidly enforced. I see no ‘lay with a woman’ thing for women so I can only assume lesbianism never was prohibited. LOL I read both Exodus and Leviticus a few years ago, learned all that sexual slavery is okay kind of stuff, well, as long as it it not during that time of month.
yeah, Jack, got it. But I listened to that Cool Hand Luke line in the front of the GN&R song,(well the whole Civil War song this morning) I can do that real well, talking, even sound real local. LOL “wah we have hea is a fayure to communcat, some meah you jus cain weach”
By Jack
April 20, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this
Thank you JAP. That question was for Mara.
Guess we can’t play anymore Mara. No one will let you answer.
By Ken
April 20, 2006 11:36 AM | Link to this
GOB… Some of my esponse may be contracdictory, but I never indicated that the statements were the exact answer. They were put down as simply ideas for another individual to ponder.
Lozen… I take some offense to the general reference of “mumbo jumbo”. I never once attacked or made disparaging remarks toward you. The statement where you claim to be of a “scientific bent” implied that I am not and you are therefore smarter or more enlightened. As a trained scientist, I also am of a “scientific bent”. That does not mean I must pick the scripture to pieces. It simply means that I may treat the scripture as a document with a different purpose that, say my lab notebook.
You are correct that the text was written thousands of years ago and that those people would have a far more limited scientific view than we do now. In fact, I would almost think that if Genesis were written today, we may have a different story, perhaps with more details and scientific data.
In fact, the final statement I made clearly indicates that I believe the story to merely reflect the idea that God created the world in which we live. The mechanism is not as important as the concept that God created it.
Quick Question: Does everyone who drives a vehicle understand how the car uses gasoline to power the vehicle? Of course not. But those people can still get behind the wheel and drive. I liken that to the creation story. Could everyone understand the mechanism that God used to create the world. Of course not, but that doesn’t mean we all can’t appreciate the world God created.
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this
Many today could never accept the fact that he probably looks like the guy down the street that owns the 7-11
The Rastafarian with the dred-locks? or the Pak? LMAO
By Mara
April 20, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this
Jack - not getting anything on that…gimme a hint?
GOB - are you implying that Jesus doesn’t look like a pinko hippie? :^)
By Jack
April 20, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this
Never mind Mara. Jewish American Princess ruined it.
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 20, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this
Sorry bout that Jack, I didn’t think Mara was with us so I kinda “took the liberty” of answering, I promise I won’t join the reindeer games any more.
By GOB
April 20, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this
I know this is way off the topic, but how offensive would it be to name your child Jesus Christ (and then your last name)?
If it werent your own kid, wouldnt that be pretty funny?
By GOB
April 20, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this
GOB - are you implying that Jesus doesn’t look like a pinko hippie? :^)
Change the clothes and the hippies and old country singers looked a lot alike. Long straight hair and a sweet beard…
By Netbanker
April 20, 2006 11:52 AM | Link to this
That’s it, RF! We’ll form the Church of Seuss!! We’ll worship Horton, have communion with Green Eggs and Ham, read the Gospel of The Grinch (good conversion story to gain members), and follow the Commandments of the Cat in the Hat. Ohhh…and the Holy Land will be at Universal Studios Islands of Adventure in Seuss Land. Services will be held in the theatre and you can ride the Carousel of Salvation afterward. We can use the moss-covered, 3-handled family credenza for an alter! Hey this creating a new religion thing is fun! No wonder we have so many of them over the course of human existence.
By Mara
April 20, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this
That’s okay Jack. I didn’t know that one anyway. And besides, I have to do some work between posts, so it’s only fair that there should be some kind of time limit just to keep the interval between lyric and answer reasonably short (and to let others play if they like)
Chilao - that is one of my very favorite West Wing episodes! Also, I’d noticed the difference in attitude regarding gays and lesbians. Even those wacko Dominionist/Reconstructionist people say that lesbianism is fine, or at least not proscribed by the Bible. I kinda laugh at that, what with the stereo-typical male fantasy…if you know what I mean ;^)
By Scalia
April 20, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this
Kimberly, I know that it is late, but I would like to comment on your 1:06 post yesterday.
It is so amazing how the media, etc. turn the focus away from the real issues. Gas is 3.65 in some places. Bush is meeting with China’s president to talk about us owing them money.
Why isn’t anybody concerned? And the legislatives, etc. are controlled by lobbyist. If you want to change the world, make some money and donate it to the party of the legislator you want to buy…I mean support.
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this
Mara - you cut/paste those lyrics into google, comes right up. might have been what JAP did, coming up with Major Payne and all, but I have never seen Major Payne, just CHL.
there is argument that since Rome ruled Judea during Christ’s time, and everyone did their hair like Caesar, Jesus would have had a buzz cut, assuming his ‘rebelness’ did not affect his hair length. MichelAngelo turned him into a long hair. Ima justa sayin’.
anybody ever wonder why Christ was so refreshing when he came on the religious scene? “You mean, love your neighbor? We don’t have to teach that generational hate anymore? How refreshing, I lost three sons fighting those(whomever)”.
Trust we have all seen Monty Python’s The Life of Brian, conjugating the Latin verbs for “Romans go home”, “People’s Front of Judea”, “He’s the Messiah, No, he over there, he’s the Messiah”, the haggling scene. Great flick.
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 20, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this
Come on Jack, I apologized for blurting out the answer instead of raising my hand first, and don’t worry about the ethnic slur I get them all the time.
By Jack
April 20, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
What ethnic group was Santa Claus?
By Monica
April 20, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this
Sorry GOB, I incorrectly addressed you in my last post.
Jewish and Proud of it, My parents took me to church when I was little, so I was introduced to Christianity that way (as are many people). When I was old enough to discover that there were other options to living, I chose my way of life based on faith. Perhaps there is a little motivation to “be good” because of the hellfire and brimsotne (ie, I’m a Christian because it’s fire insurance), but that’s not the main reason. I can’t offer “proof” the the Bible is inspired by God - at least, not the proof you are asking about. I just believe.
I don’t think of myself as a “Bible thumper,” although others on the blog might not share my opinion, but I do believe in the hellfire and damnation part of it as well. I just don’t use the “turn or burn” technique because it’s not effective and produces the opposite of the desired result.
With regard to the Gwinnett mom, well… I’m also an English teacher and have strong feelings on censorship. If I didn’t want my child reading something that was in the library, then I would tell my child not to read it. Or, , I would read it with my child and discuss the offensive aspects. I do think that books should be age appropriate. I don’t want a fourth grader reading Judy Blume’s Forever.
Sorry for the rambling!
By Jack
April 20, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this
Jewish and Proud of It. OK Sorry for the slur. Bad day at the office. Killer sax solo in that song isn’t it?
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this
with the stereo-typical male fantasy…if you know what I mean
huh, what you mean there?, please expand. LOL (JOKING!!)
By Netbanker
April 20, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this
And the legislatives, etc. are controlled by lobbyist And this comment from The Vent today is sooo appropriate…”I think congressmen should wear uniforms like NASCAR drivers so we could identify their corporate sponsors.”
Chilao…my brother and I used to watch The Life of Brian every Easter and The Holy Grail on Christmas Eve. It was our little ritual while partaking of the holy herb.
By Netbanker
April 20, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this
I don’t want a fourth grader reading Judy Blume’s Forever So Monica are you saying that we shouldn’t have 4th graders chanting “We must, we must, we must increase our busts!”? LOL
By Jack
April 20, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this
That lady didn’t even read the book. She says since the movie was rated PG-13 that the book was too risque for elementary school age children. The corn-cob is probably more than 6 ft…
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 20, 2006 12:20 PM | Link to this
Apology accepted Jack, to be honest I didn’t really care for the music…but I love the lyrics :)
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 12:21 PM | Link to this
NetB - appropriate time. LOL, I watched The Holy Grail about a month ago, coworker loaned me the DVD. I thought I had seen before but had not. just parts of it. I had to have him explain the van-picking-up-the-looneys part, though. I have Brian on VHS, my top 5-10 flicks for me.
By Monica
April 20, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this
NetB, so which one had the holy hand grenade while you were smoking the holy herb?
By lozen
April 20, 2006 12:24 PM | Link to this
Ken, I simply meant the mumbo jumbo of interpreting one thing from the bible one way and then the next thing in just the opposite (or a different way). That has always been so frustrating to me. Bibliolaters twist themselves into knots to “prove” something makes sense instead of just admitting it makes no sense.
By Netbanker
April 20, 2006 12:32 PM | Link to this
hehe about the grenade…scary thing is my Dad worked for the DOD for many years so we actually had an official training hand grenade that we played with. Our guinea pig played the part of ferocious ‘bunny’ in the Holy Grail. Run Away! Run Away!
By Mara
April 20, 2006 12:36 PM | Link to this
Jack - Santa Claus was Dutch, therefore most likely of white European ethnicity….unless, of course, you trace him back to Saint Nicholas who was reportedly either Greek or Turkish.
By Just Being Me
April 20, 2006 12:38 PM | Link to this
Renee, NetB, et al.
Regarding the whole “God’s love is conditional” thing…
I haven’t discussed my beliefs regarding hell openly on this blog, and I’m going to try to avoid that subject, if possible.
But, I will say that I’m not 100% convinced that the hell I was taught about actually exists. I do believe there is a hell, but I don’t know if Christians have gotten all the details right.
God’s love is unconditional. His love isn’t determined by your behavior or actions, rejection of Him, unbelief, sin or lifestyle. He loves you regardless. However, his reward is indeed conditional, and depends on whether or not you’ve demonstrated faith to believe in Him, accepted Jesus as your savior, and followed his teachings.
Followers of Christ are expected, to the dismay of most intellectuals, to have blind faith in Him (not in man). Much of what we are expected to believe makes no sense at all, but we are to have faith that when the whole picture is revealed, all our questions will be answered. There’s no Christian or Bible scholar that knows everything about God and His plan, the most any of us can do is apply the scriptures and our own understanding. That said, I know that my “response” (if you can even call it that) will come across as a cop-out kind of answer, but it’s the best I can offer to two people whom I’d really like to know the love of God.
The Bible makes it clear that we won’t have all the answers now, and that we don’t see the whole picture today, but we will.
Just like I tell my daughter: I don’t put her on punishment, she puts herself on punishment because she knows the rules and the consequences for breaking them, and chooses to break them anyway. I’d say the same of mankind: God doesn’t condemn us to hell, we do that ourselves.
My bottom line is always the same: we don’t have all the answers because if we did, we wouldn’t need faith. Without faith, it is impossible to please God.
By Monica
April 20, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this
NetB, I’m on the floor laughing at the image of your guinea pig playing the bunny! The Holy Grail is a family favorite. My brother and I used the music from the credits as back-up music on our answering machine message.
By RF
April 20, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this
That’s it, RF! We’ll form the Church of Seuss!!
You certainly thought that up quickly!! Scary part is, it sounds exactly like most churches out there (I especially like the meeting location). OH, do the elders or deacons get to wear the stiped top hats, or is that reserved for the minister?? LOL
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 20, 2006 12:46 PM | Link to this
However, his *reward is indeed conditional, and depends on whether or not you’ve demonstrated faith to believe in Him, accepted Jesus as your savior, and followed his teachings*
JBM, does this mean I don’t get to partake in G-d’s reward?
By Ken
April 20, 2006 12:47 PM | Link to this
Lozen… The Bible like everything else in the world has a purpose. To take that even further, the stories and books of the Bible also have a purpose.
I agree, depending on what one is looking for in the creation stories, it can be confusing and even contradictory. That is why I do not get lost in the details, but instead look at it for the message or lesson being taught.
To do much more than that (i.e. interpret) can be very dangerous. Too often humans can’t see the forest for the trees and that is especially true with the Bible. One line about this, that or the other must be taken into conext of the entire work, and more specifically through the lens of the Gospels.
Luther likened the Bible to a cradle rather than a rulebook. That it supported our faith rather than shackle us with doctrine. Obviously the last statment is overly simplified.
By Jack
April 20, 2006 12:49 PM | Link to this
Mara. That means that Moose may be related to Santa?
By Monica
April 20, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this
JBM, great job of answering what I couldn’t answer yesterday!
By RF
April 20, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this
so we actually had an official training hand grenade that we played with.
You mean they made training grenades that were actually loaded with something? So how does one practice with a grenade? You either throw it right, or you blow your own face off. I can just see two boys in the yard and BAM, up, up, and out goes the guinea pig.
Wasn’t there a story out recently about a teacher who actually had a live mortar shell or something on his desk and didn’t know it was still live until he hit his desk with it? Messed up his hand pretty good as I recall.
By Jack
April 20, 2006 12:53 PM | Link to this
The bible was written to answer man’s ultimate questions. The answers are proven after we leave this world. (then it’s too late)
By chuck
April 20, 2006 12:53 PM | Link to this
JaP, I’m not sure how I come down on that issue. I am not very familiar with the books and I have never seen the movies. Because of some of the things I had heard about the books when they first came out, I didn’t let my daughter read them until this past year when she turned 14. After she read the first one, we sat down and talked about it. I asked her how the book stacked up in regards to Christian principles. She was able to tell me what was wrong with the book and explained how it was fantasy/fiction and that it had no affect on her in that regard so I allowed her to read the others.
There are books that I don’t think belong in a middle school library. There have been a number of books on awards lists that are laced with vile profanity including the “F” word. We pulled that one from the shelves. If we are going to punish them for USING that language we can’t furnish them that language without being hypocritical.
Overall, I think that schools should stick to books that are well written and have a fairly positive message though there is room for the Poes and Stines among us.
By Mara
April 20, 2006 12:54 PM | Link to this
JBM - …she puts herself on punishment because she knows the rules and the consequences for breaking them, and chooses to break them anyway.
Something I’ve considered regarding God, man, damnation and sin. I don’t recall if you’ve ever mentioned the age of your daughter, but lets say for the sake of argument that her age is perportional to yours as mans is to God. Suppose you told your daughter that if she fibbed to, say, her teacher, she’d be beaten every day for three hours until she was 80. Do you think that she’d be able to truly grasp the enormity of the punishment? Is man, with his limited ability to grasp the concept of “eternity” in any different strait than your daughter would be?
By The72John
April 20, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this
I have tried to explain this concept a number of times, but Lozen, john and others either can’t or won’t grasp it. Taking verses out of context, you can USE the Bible to justify almost anything. Christianity does not USE the Bible, it STUDIES the Bible in CONTEXT and follows it. Studying the Bible inductively one does not make those mistakes
It’s not that we can’t grasp your logical contortions, it’s that they are laughable. Context? Where does your context come from? Fundamentalists always manufacture some reason why verse a ISN’T meant to be taken literally, but verse b IS.
You lay claim to being the only person who is entitled to put context to your verses. There are many articles written by biblical scholars whose credentials far outstrip your own self-declared expertise that point to the context of the verses generally perceived to be anti-gay, yet you and your other fundamentalist friends REFUSE to accept that there might be some context involved there. Those verses MUST be read absolutely.
But when it comes to mitigating verses that seem to support that which society as a whole now considers unacceptable, you are the first ones shouting “Context! Context!”
By Mara
April 20, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this
Jack, wouldn’t that be a hoot if he was?!! LOL!
By Just Being Me
April 20, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this
JAP, I haven’t read the article about the Gwinnett mom. Will do so when I get back in the office (about to run out for lunch - first time in ages!).
On the surface, I can say that I’m as tired as anyone else is of Christians imposing their beliefs on those who don’t share them. I hate that with a passion. It’s okay to share your beliefs, but don’t force others to hold to your values if they don’t share your beliefs. That just really irks me.
I haven’t read Harry Potter because I understand it has wizard and/or witchcraft themes and I’m not even slightly interested in witches or wizards or wiccans or anything of the like. I probably wouldn’t condone my child reading it, and I would raise hell if it was assigned reading, but I wouldn’t necessarily want it banned from the school’s library.
Like I said, I need to read the article and see if I can get a little more knowledge about the book and the case.
By lozen
April 20, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this
Once we have experienced the love of the Universe, we don’t need the love of one religion’s holy person.
By GOB
April 20, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this
On the whole heaven/hell thing…and this is thrown out to everyone…Do you believe Hitler and Stalin are in heaven or hell?
By Brian Curtis
April 20, 2006 01:07 PM | Link to this
Here’s a simple question: Countless people have ‘misunderstood’ or “misinterpreted” the Bible throughout history to justify all sorts of wacky things: slavery, racism, holy war, inquisitions, theocracy, etc. Most of them—possibly ALL of them—were sincere in their beliefs and thought they were geniunely doing God’s will. They had plausible interpretations for what they read, and insisted it WAS in context. And as we now recognize, they were wrong.
So, for those of you following the Bible… What makes you so sure YOU’VE got it right? Or that ANYONE has?
By chuck
April 20, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this
Laugh away 72j. If a history professor writes an article that says the South won the Civil War, it really doesn’t matter what his credentials are.
By lozen
April 20, 2006 01:10 PM | Link to this
And it is so interesting that chuck never answers any of the questions put to him about religion. He jumps on and makes his pronouncements, ignores anything that he can’t answer, and leaves until he wants to make the next pronouncement that “gay is evil” most people are selfish and childish (except him of course) and therefore their personal lives should be controlled by the church and the gov’t.
By The72John
April 20, 2006 01:10 PM | Link to this
Why are we so worked up about profanity? Profanity isn’t vile - in most cases it’s either silly or just trite. It CAN be used effectively in literature or film or television if it’s part of the character development and relevant to the setting, but they’re just words…and most of the ones that people get so worked up about aren’t even actually profane - they’re just crude.
By obsessing SO much over language, you just make kids that much more eager to use the forbidden words.
By chuck
April 20, 2006 01:13 PM | Link to this
Gob, I can’t say this as a certainty and neither can anyone else, because we have NO IDEA whether either of them ever made a commitment to Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord, but based on outward signs, bet the house on hell.
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 01:15 PM | Link to this
Church of Seuss? Get another 10,000 members and you’ll get tax writeoffs, no property taxes or ‘income’ taxes, host of other ‘benefits’. and for those who disagree with that status, and ‘defame’ you, plenty of lawyers available for hire. LOL
By GOB
April 20, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this
I haven’t read Harry Potter because I understand it has wizard and/or witchcraft themes and I’m not even slightly interested in witches or wizards or wiccans or anything of the like. I probably wouldn’t condone my child reading it, and I would raise hell if it was assigned reading, but I wouldn’t necessarily want it banned from the school’s library.
I know NetB already asked this, but would you approve of the Chronicles of Narnia for your daughter? I guess what I dont understand about this kind of argument (it has witches/wizards, etc) is that parents will let their kids watch all kinds of stuff on tv, have toy guns and swords and that kind of thing, and not worry that their kid is going to go shoot or stab someone. Why do you trust your kid with that, but not with a book. If a kid is smart enough to know that, even though they have a fake plastic sword (or even golf club or baseball bat), they shouldnt stab people or hit them with a bat, then shouldnt they be smart enough to know that what they read in a clearly fictional book isnt real?
Parents and teachers complain about kids not reading, but when a really well written set of books comes along, the kids arent allowed to read them. How does that make any sense at all.
Has anyone who has actually read the Harry Potter books found anything that they felt would be objectionable to a 11-15 year old?
By The72John
April 20, 2006 01:18 PM | Link to this
If a history professor writes an article that says the South won the Civil War, it really doesn’t matter what his credentials are
Yet AGAIN, Chuck, you intentionally confuse actual historical FACTS with biblical literature. And yet again, you elevate YOUR “understanding” above that of dedicated scholars. But then, that’s the kind of arrogant dismisal of reality that one expects from fundamentalists.
Brian Curtis is exactly right. People like you have laid claim to a perfect understanding of the Bible for centuries. In light of the fact that many of these views conflict, someone is wrong.
I’m guessing…it’s you.
By Jack
April 20, 2006 01:18 PM | Link to this
Chuck. They’re still fighting that one! LOL
By Jack
April 20, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this
A child can go to the mall and hear more profanity than was in the H.P. movies.
By Tim
April 20, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this
Why are we so worked up about profanity?
and if you’re looking at it from a Christian perspective… technically the only “cuss” word is using Gods name in vain (at least that’s what I was taught)… the others are just “dirty” words (as my nana so eloquently and southernly puts it)
By GOB
April 20, 2006 01:23 PM | Link to this
I believe Hitler and Stalin are in their graves - what’s left of them. That’s all we can know. This is why we want to believe in a literal hell. Wouldn’t it be nice to think they’re burning in hell? Well, that don’t make it so.
There are 75 arguments for the existence of god that people use over and over. Here’s one that just came to mind:
COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (1) If I say something must have a cause, it has a cause. (2) I say the universe must have a cause. (3) Therefore, the universe has a cause. (4) Therefore, God exists.
By lozen
April 20, 2006 01:26 PM | Link to this
Ooooppppps! Typed in GOB’s name instead of my own….
By chuck
April 20, 2006 01:31 PM | Link to this
BC, I look at it this way. If you want to understand God, go to His Word. Motive and your relationship with God is going to determine whether or not you understand and correctly apply God’s Word. That is why I try to study it inductively. Since I know you have no desire to go to the website, I’ll make it easier for you by cutting and pasting what I mean about inductive study. I think if you were to study the Bible in this way you would change the way that you view it.
Introduction to Methodical or Inductive Bible Study What is it? Simply stated, inductive or methodical Bible study is an orderly procedure used to study the Bible. The Bible is used as the primary source of information.
Why do it? Kay Arthur writes, “Inductive Bible study draws you into personal interaction with the Scripture and thus with the God of the Scriptures so that your beliefs are based on a prayerful understanding and legitimate interpretation of Scripture - truth that transforms you when you live by it.”
The Seven Steps of Inductive Study See
Inquire
Answer
Summarize
Evaluate
Apply
Associate/correlate
Kay Arthur distills these seven steps into three: Observation, Interpretation, Application.
As we read the Bible, we should be constantly observing. When we decide to study one book of the Bible, we observe the book as a whole. Then we observe the parts of that book moving from the largest part, a chapter or unit, to the smallest part, a paragraph. When we have observed the paragraph, then we stop to interpret, evaluate, apply and associate or correlate that paragraph with the unit. When we have studied each paragraph in the unit, we then interpret, evaluate, and apply the unit and associate or correlate that unit to the chapter. When we have studied each unit in the chapter, we stop to interpret, evaluate, and apply the chapter and associate or correlate it to the book. When we have completed the study of the book, we should stop to interpret, evaluate, and apply the truths from the book and correlate or associate it back to the Bible as a whole.
The Three Laws of the Heart W. W. White gives the following three “laws of the heart” which adequately sum up the spiritual attitude of the Bible student:
The Law of Prayer - The Word of God can be adequately understood only through communion with God. So, let us constantly use prayer as a means of Bible study.
The Law of the Holy Spirit - The Holy Spirit has been given to reveal to us the deep things of God. Therefore, let us continually seek His illumination.
The Law of our Spiritual Nature - Our spiritual natures have the capacity and the ability to respond to God’s truths. We must, therefore, trust Him and act promptly upon impressions which we are certain come from Him through the Holy Spirit as we read His Word.
Book Survey Purpose: To “see” the book as a whole before examining its parts.
Read the entire book in one sitting. Don’t stop to make notes, formulate questions or meditate. Read to get the big picture. Some instructors recommend that you read it at least three times in this manner before beginning your study.
Read the book again looking for the answers to these questions (you may not be able to answer them all - just answer the ones that you can):
Who is the book about? (the main character)
What are the main events?
When was it written? (What historical clues are in the book that would help you establish a date?)
Where did it happen?
Who is the author?
Who are the recipients? Are they Gentiles or Jews? Did the author seem to know them personally?
What type of literature is it?
historical
biographical
poetic
proverbial
prophetic
epistle (letter)
combination
What is the atmosphere of the book? (How did you feel when you were reading it? angry, sad, etc.)
What caused the author to write to these people? What was happening at the time? What were the needs of the recipients?
Make notes on all you can learn from the text about the:
Historical background - information about the time in which they were living
Cultural background - information about customs and lifestyles
Spiritual background - any references to religions or beliefs in God or gods
Note the key words and phrases. Kay Arthur defines a key word or phrase as one which the author uses repeatedly or which, when removed from the text, leaves the content devoid of meaning. The words God, Jesus Christ, and Holy Spirit are always key words. You may wish to color code these words in the text at this time.
If the book is biographical, note:
men involved
their concept of and attitude toward God
their actions, reactions and motives
If the book is an epistle (a letter) note:
identity and characteristics of author
identity, location, characteristics and problems of the recipients
answers given to their problem
occasion and purpose of the letter
Do any of the chapters appear to be crucial (containing material which determines absolutely the truth or falsity of a view or theory, decisive), climactic (a chapter where the progressive events throughout the rest of the book culminate, or reach a final effect), or pivotal (a place at which the action or presentation changes directions)?
Everything the author does throughout the book was designed to accomplish one major purpose. Can you identify this major theme in this book? (Why was this book written? Did the author want to evangelize, convict, warn, instruct, remind encourage?) Is it stated in a verse? If so, what is that verse?
How does this book relate to the message of the Bible?
Did you notice any major divisions or units in the book other than by chapters? A book may be divided according to (more than one may apply):
dates
places
topics
doctrine
key thoughts
reign of kings
major characters
If you are a visual learner, it may be helpful to construct a book chart. The book chart would reflect the divisions you noticed as well as contain chapter titles that would help you to recall the content of that chapter.
Make notes of any questions you have at this point in your study.
Now you may refer to sources which will give you insight into the Historical, Cultural and Spiritual background ONLY. Some excellent online sources are listed below:
Easton’s Bible Dictionary: http://bible.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/EastonBibleDictionary/ (type in the name of the book you are studying)
Smith’s Bible Dictionary: http://bible.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/SmithsBibleDictionary/ (type in the name of the book you are studying)
Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible: http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/JamiesonFaussetBrown/ (click on the name of the book you are studying; click on the “Introduction” to the book)
By GOB
April 20, 2006 01:33 PM | Link to this
Not sure who posted the 1:23, but it wasnt me…
By RF
April 20, 2006 01:35 PM | Link to this
The Harry Potter books are about as threatening as Dr. Seuss. They are the classic story of good vs. evil, and good wins every time. As chuck’s daughter proved, they are not a threat to mainstream faith. Yes, they do involve wizardry, but there’s no spell instruction or promotion of wizardry and witchcraft in them. They’re FICTION, and not portrayed as anything else. EVERY person who has raised hell about them hasn’t even read them, they’ve just “heard” about them. If we ban those, and any words with “cuss words”, we’ll be banning every piece of fiction out there soon. Let’s see, “Of Mice and Men” is on our reading list, and it has all kinds of cussing. OH, “Macbeth” has witches, “Romeo and Juliet” talks about stars, so it must promote astrology, which is soooooo sinful…need I go on??? Folks got to get a grip!! If you don’t like it, don’t let your kids read it. My oldest LOVE the Narnia stuff and will get to read Harry Potter when he’s ready. He knows the difference between fantasy and reality.
By RF
April 20, 2006 01:36 PM | Link to this
A child can go to the mall and hear more profanity than was in the H.P. movies.
Jack, they hear more than that in the school hallways, on the bus, in the music parents let them listen to, and even on TV (they know the words being bleeped out).
By The72John
April 20, 2006 01:36 PM | Link to this
I haven’t read Harry Potter because I understand it has wizard and/or witchcraft themes and I’m not even slightly interested in witches or wizards or wiccans or anything of the like. I probably wouldn’t condone my child reading it, and I would raise hell if it was assigned reading, but I wouldn’t necessarily want it banned from the school’s library
The “witchcraft” and “wizardry” of HP is in no way related to the Christian idea of witchcraft, i.e. selling one’s soul to the Devil in return for power. It’s just fantasy. It pulls from various mythologies, fairy tales, etc.
JBM, while you certainly have the right to read what you want, and have your child read only what you approve, I urge you to reconsider. The books have sparked an incredible love of reading in children around the world, and furthermore, my sister, who is very much a religious conservative, loves the books. So does my neice, her daughter.
Don’t believe the hype, or the anti-hype in this case. See for yourself.
By Renee
April 20, 2006 01:38 PM | Link to this
JBM - your yellow teeth/bananas example was sooooo funny..
Okay - now to your God unconditional love post. If God loves all his children unconditionally, there is no conditional reward for his children who have obeyed your orders. Or at least a conditional punishment to an eternal life of flames, fires, ghouls, goblins and whatever else is supposed to be in hell. If he loves us all the same, he would make sure we all obtained the same paradise.
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 01:38 PM | Link to this
Do you believe Hitler and Stalin are in heaven or hell?
doesn’t it depend on which Christian denomination?
some say heaven or hell, upon death.
some say what I call ‘the holding area’, think it called ‘purgatory’. decision to be made later.
some say they stay in the ground until the second coming of Christ, then things get sorted out as to heaven or hell
and all those three potentials in one base religion.
By GOB
April 20, 2006 01:41 PM | Link to this
No problem Lozen…I tend to have that effect on a lot of women….Jk
By Tim
April 20, 2006 01:44 PM | Link to this
I find it amusing that a lot of the people who say “I have not read the Harry Potter books because of the witchcraft portrayed in the books” usually haven’t read any other books in the recent future either… actually the reason why most of them aren’t reading them is that THEY DON’T READ ANYTHING lol
By Renee
April 20, 2006 01:44 PM | Link to this
I grew up reading the Chronicles of Narnia, Tolkien, and many other “questionable” books. The books were well written and were entertaining.
And you don’t have to believe in witchcraft to enjoy the books. Geez. Do you think if you open the book, an evil spell will come through the pages.
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this
and that did not even touch Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, etc etc etc etc. and there could be even more Christian ones I don’t know about. LOL Maybe be in transit, but being considered bad-guys, did not get the express and are on the slow-train/slow-boat, them having to a long agonizing time not knowing the destinatio.
I think Hitler was an atheist, so doubt he worried about anything.
By chuck
April 20, 2006 01:45 PM | Link to this
john, if your sister is a religious conservative, I would love to hear how you respond to her when she tells you that homosexuality is sin and that abortion is murder. Do you call her “scum of the earth?”
By The72John
April 20, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this
The best thing EVER about the Anti-Potterites was the group that read an “article” on The Onion where kids talked about how HP had convinced them that devil worship was the way to go, and then didn’t realize it was satire. They started one of those e-mail chains telling everyone to open their eyes to the “evil.
By Jack
April 20, 2006 01:53 PM | Link to this
Put some Clive Barker in the schools. That’ll scare the Hell out of them. LOL
By lozen
April 20, 2006 01:53 PM | Link to this
“Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind; it is abomination.” Leviticus I’ve been doing some research on the word “abomination” because there’s such a religious thing about homosexuality with Christians and they’re always quoting this one. It seems to me that all the things referred to as abominations in the old testament were the cultural practices of other groups the Israelites were meeting in their wanderings after leaving Egypt (the ones they didn’t kill first). They were being exposed to other cultures with other goddesses/gods with different ideas about food, sexuality, the way to live, etc. Moses, since he was leading them, set forth rules and regulations to try to keep them together as a group worshipping Yahweh rather than being incorporated into other groups. He had a hard time. The Israelites were very attracted to these other cultural ideas and practices. What’s the difference between an abomination and a sin? “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind; it is abomination.” It was the norm in some of the other cultures they encountered for men to be with men. Moses didn’t like that just like he didn’t like them eating creeping things (lizards?), or for men and women to swap pants or skirts back and forth! Deuteronomy 18: When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. By the time of proverbs, of course, this had changed”
Proverbs 6:16 16 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: 17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, 18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, 19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren. Hummmmmm, sound like anybody we know?
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this
and Stalin might get a greater good nod. sure he killed millions but might have, in the process, saved the lifes of even millions more. so, who’s to say? LOL
If you can only feed 5 million but have 8 million, might be a greater-good issue to kill off 3 million, so those 5 million can live.
Ima justa sayin’….I think we have heard that greater good argument for centuries.
theoretical, guys; I am not a trained genocidist. LOL
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this
and Stalin might get a greater good nod. sure he killed millions but might have, in the process, saved the lifes of even millions more. so, who’s to say? LOL
If you can only feed 5 million but have 8 million, might be a greater-good issue to kill off 3 million, so those 5 million can live.
Ima justa sayin’….I think we have heard that greater good argument for centuries.
theoretical, guys; I am not a trained genocidist. LOL
By Tim
April 20, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this
Geez. Do you think if you open the book, an evil spell will come through the pages.
OH MAN!!! that would be toooooooo cool!!!!! that would probably sell a couple million more copies of the books
By The72John
April 20, 2006 01:59 PM | Link to this
john, if your sister is a religious conservative, I would love to hear how you respond to her when she tells you that homosexuality is sin and that abortion is murder. Do you call her “scum of the earth?”
You see, Chuck, that’s the difference between you and most other people. My sister actually does love me, and doesn’t go around telling me how evil I am, how I make her feel “uncomfortable”, or that I’m going to Hell, or any of the other things that you do.
In fact, Chuck, almost NO ONE does those things. Why, I work in an office FULL of religious conservatives who like and value me, all of whom know I am gay. They also don’t tell me I’m evil, going to hell, that I make them “uncomfortable” to be around, or that I don’t deserve to have my basic freedoms protected.
It’s what separates FANATICS from CONSERVATIVES. It’s why you are a hateful bigot and other people are not. It’s that difference that makes you the despicable creature that you are.
By Jack
April 20, 2006 02:00 PM | Link to this
I think I am, therefore I am. (Unless I think I’m GOB.LOL)
By Monica
April 20, 2006 02:00 PM | Link to this
Amen, RF! My kids are reading Of Mice and Men as I am typing this (reading day), and they are actually READING and not SLEEPING! They love it. I always have success with Catcher in the Rye, and it drops the F bomb once or twice. You know, we really should do away with all Shakespeare because of the excessive amount of sexual innuendo - or “double entrendre” in the literature world. How about mythology? There are a lot of demi-gods around thanks to the promiscuity of the gods and goddesses…
By Tim
April 20, 2006 02:00 PM | Link to this
lozen… “What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality” by Daniel A. Helminiak… I have referred this book on here before… but just in case
By thegoddess
April 20, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this
The “witchcraft” and “wizardry” of HP is in no way related to the Christian idea of witchcraft, i.e. selling one’s soul to the Devil in return for power. And true witchcraft and wizardry are in no way related to that Christian idea of witchcraft either!
By RF
April 20, 2006 02:04 PM | Link to this
Put some Clive Barker in the schools. That’ll scare the Hell out of them. LOL
All but a few of them wouldn’t be able to understand it, and those that do would be intrigued by it.
By lozen
April 20, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this
And these two are for chuck and that loooooonnnnnnng thing he just shared with us:
13 A. ARGUMENT FROM HAVING SPECIAL FAITH
1. Natural man cannot understand what the bible says. 2. You can’t understand the scripture with the mind, the brain. You can only understand it with your heart through faith.
3. I know it’s true because it has been revealed to me because my heart is open. You don’t have faith, your heart has not been opened by revelation, therefore you cannot see. 4. Therefore, God exists.
By Renee
April 20, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this
LOL Tim. Sure would. Imagine, a different spell per copy.
By Tim
April 20, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this
Renee… I think you should contact J.K. Rowling and tell her :)
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this
Lozen - I have a older(than me) friend who studies muchly and she would argue that the Jews came up with all those this/that/or the other things, in say Leviticus, to differentiate themselves from local rivals.
and she always adds: “And it has served them quite well over the centuries, hasn’t it”.
By Jack
April 20, 2006 02:18 PM | Link to this
Didn’t think Chuck had a long thing. Lozen do you know something you’re not telling us about?
By chuck
April 20, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this
water…ducks back
By The72John
April 20, 2006 02:23 PM | Link to this
Put some Clive Barker in the schools. That’ll scare the Hell out of them. LOL
Surely you’re not suggesting they put books by known homosexuals into our libraries!
By Netbanker
April 20, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this
I think the striped top hat should be reserved for the minister. The elders can wear robes with Thing 1, Thing 2, etc. on them.
A training grenade doesn’t explode. It’s an non-functioning replica and we quickly learned not to throw it directly at each other because you could seriously hurt someone if you hit them with it. It’s a one pound piece of solid metal. I wonder where that thing has gotten to.
Monica…I haven’t seen either movie in a while so I’m about due. I try to use the Life of Brian theme song as one of my own, especially when things are looking grim…”Always look on the bright side of life”
JBM…I appreciate your sentiments, but worry not! I know the love of God in my heart and feel His peaceful presence in my life. I take time every day to sit or stand completely still and silent usually in my garden, or the woods in the backyard, or the tree covered lane where Abby and I go for walks. The great outdoors are my cathedrals, the birds my choirs, the flowers my stained glass windows, the rustle of leaves my music. Abby is my living example of unconditional love, finding joy in simple things, and approaching both whole heartedly, with your entire being.
Where I just don’t buy into christianity is that SOLE route to God through belief in Jesus. It’s the only religion I can think of that has that narrow a route to the love of God and that completely discounts good works. I rather image Heaven would be better filled with people who’ve never known Jesus, but who have cared for the sick, the poor, fed the hungry, given shelter to the homeless, loved the unloveabled anyway, and shown kindness with no thought of repayment than a bunch of people who did none of that but get in because they believe and said I’m sorry. The doctrines of christianity say that even Hitler could apologize and have been truly repentant for his sins, accepted Jesus and viola…in like flint while those who lived their life LIKE Jesus without knowing him are burning in Hell. That just doesn’t compute!
I just don’t get the Christian vs Harry Potter thing. It’s fiction!! You know…MAKE BELIEVE. Even with the witches and wizards the magic is NOT treated like a religion or worshipped in any way. It just IS in the same way that Santa’s Reindeer fly from having eaten magic corn and we don’t worry about that magic or even the Winter Warlock from the children’s show to cause kids to question their religion.
I’ve read years 1-4 of the Harry books and can’t find a thing in there that would make a child even begin to question their religious beliefs anymore than any of the Disney stories or Mother Goose stories or Brother’s Grimm would cause question. I’ll bet dollars to donuts that the Gwinnett Mom’s daughter has seen sleeping beauty which contains an evil witch for a step mother who poisons her adopted daughter and neither of them thought a thing about it. As a child I grew up with a firm religious upbringing and read all kinds of fiction/fantasy books such as The Chronicles of Narnia, The Phantom Tollbooth, The Last of the Really Great Wangdoodles, The Hobbit, Watership Down, The Mouse and the Motorcycle, and on and on and on. My parents strongly encouraged us to READ and we all (extended family included) have a love of reading and curious minds. Nothing I read back then would have caused me to question my religion because they’re entirely separate things and none of those books (Harry P included) are direct attacks on christianity let alone being in a form blatant enough for a child to understand the attack. I had no idea until years later that Narnia was written by a christian author and supposedly has christian imagery in it. I can see some of it now if I work hard, but there isn’t anything like a one-to-one correlation of characters to the main players of the Christian religion or even having the story follow the life of Christ.
Just like I dreamed up the Church of Seuss, I can say with reasonableness that Harry represents Christ, Dumbledore - God, Voldemort - Satan, Ron - pick an apostle, Hermione is Mary Magdeline. They’re just characters in a make believe book that has inspired millions of children to use their MINDS and IMAGINATION and to enjoy reading instead of sitting like lumps in front of the TV or Game Boy. Geez…you’d think it was homosexual propaganda to recruit gays.
By Jack
April 20, 2006 02:30 PM | Link to this
Just pickin Chuck.
By Mara
April 20, 2006 02:31 PM | Link to this
I have to admit that I “borrowed” this from Andrew Sullivans website, but it was so apropo, I couldn’t resist. It probably articulates the view of many of us agnostics -
*Chadrick123 writes:
There has been lots written about the journey of faith. Most of us spend our whole life in our quest for understanding. The journey out of faith is just as intense and just as long-lasting as any journey into it. Most of us who have been Christians in the past are always conflicted with the good we experienced alongside the bad. We finally come to terms and admit that we learned many beautiful and meaningful concepts about life, death and god, even though we reject the greater part of a previously held religious belief. Today, I do not call myself a Christian simply because I do not claim Jesus as a personal savior as that seems to be a defining requirement. But I still hold dear some wonderful concepts which can be correctly called Christian because they were taught to me in a Christian context. Life, at its best, is a journey. Teaching our children that at an early age seems important to me, more than teaching that they must believe one thing or another. I have far greater confidence in the people who admit there are lots of concepts they’re uncertain of than I am those who are sure they’ve got it all nailed down. There’s nothing to be ashamed of in admitting we’re still in the process of learning and becoming. At 77 years I’m far more comfortable still being on the journey than I was as a brash young man convinced I had all the answers. Calling myself an agnostic is comfortable for me because I’m unwilling to declare that there is no god, as much as I’m not entirely convinced there is one.*
By RF
April 20, 2006 02:32 PM | Link to this
OMG Monica, I forgot how deviant and satanic Greek mythology is!!! We simply MUST remove it!! My remedial kids for some reason get all into that too.
I always read a snippet from “Of Mice and Men” to my kids. After they get over the shock, and find out it’s a real book, they can’t WAIT to read it. Funny thing is, they do more reading and more thinking than with anything else we read. Shame isn’t it, that the censors can’t see the educational value of interesting reading.
By The72John
April 20, 2006 02:32 PM | Link to this
water…ducks back
Hmmm…I think “turtle” is a more apt metaphor for you, chuck. Like all good fundamentalists, when an idea comes your way that conflicts with your inherent narrowness, you retreat into a shell of denial until the unfortunate idea is driven away, never to trouble you with reality again.
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 20, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this
Imagine, a different spell per copy
I think it would depend on the spell. HEHE.
By Monica
April 20, 2006 02:39 PM | Link to this
Hey 72John, “those books” are already in our libraries - Walt Whitman’s works, for one.
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 02:41 PM | Link to this
water…ducks back
I did not know it that was a response to Lozen’s comment about a looooong post/her rebuttal or Jack’s insinuation about Lozen and Chuck, and Jack, I did not get that until maybe the third read. LOL
By The72John
April 20, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this
*Hey 72John, “those books” are already in our libraries - Walt Whitman’s works, for one. *
Oh my gosh, and we’re wasting time on Harry Potter? Let’s get the real evil out of our libraries!
By Just Being Me
April 20, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this
John, your 1:59 was very good, I hope the point was received.
Renee,
If God loves all his children unconditionally, there is no conditional reward for his children who have obeyed your orders. Or at least a conditional punishment to an eternal life of flames, fires, ghouls, goblins and whatever else is supposed to be in hell. If he loves us all the same, he would make sure we all obtained the same paradise.
You’re basing your argument on the idea that I believe in an eternal life of flames, fires, ghouls, goblins, etc., and you know that I don’t.
Furthermore, it is an absolutely false statement that you can’t love a person unconditionally and reward and/or punish them conditionally. You love your daughter unconditionally, but if she rejects or disobeys your rules, she will be punished accordingly. Likewise, I love my child unconditionally. However, if she breaks a rule, she will be punished. My love for her doesn’t change when I punish her. Of course, it’s hard for me to see her cry or holed up in her room, but I know that my punishment is justified because she failed to accept my guidance and/or follow my rule.
Along the same line, you said that “if he loves us all the same, he’ll make sure we all have the same [reward].” He’s not going to force us to accept Him, just like you don’t force a child to do right. You just teach them, guide them, and let them fly on their own. He makes “the same reward” available to all of us, but He won’t force it on us. If we decide to follow Him, we reap the lifelong and eternal benefits. If we refuse to follow Him, we suffer the consequences of that decision.
Others, I’ll get back to you as soon as I click “post” on this one… don’t want my comment to be too long!
By Brian Curtis
April 20, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this
On fantasy fiction (Narnia, Harry Potter, etc.): I’m curious what these evangelicals think the “danger” might be of kids reading about witches and wizards. Are they going to learn—gasp!—how to cast REAL SPELLS?
Doesn’t that presuppose that such things really exist? Come on, people; if your kids start waving sticks around and quoting Latin… what are you afraid is going to happen, exactly?
Harry Potter’s magic is fake, remember? F-I-C-T-I-O-N. Look it up! If your kid gets “corrupted” by Harry Potter stories, all he’s going to do is babble nonsense and play make-believe. The skies will NOT rain fire, the moon will NOT turn blood-red, and a tentacled beast will NOT emerge from the bowels of the Earth to devour us all.
Sheesh. Superstitious freaks.
By RF
April 20, 2006 02:49 PM | Link to this
Oh GEEZ, if chuck’s sharing the long thing here, I’m LEAVIN’!!!
By Robert
April 20, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this
“What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality” by Daniel A. Helminiak
HMMMMMM…this is a book written by a guy who is homosexual AND a former Roman Catholic Priest! Yeah, HE ought to have HIS facts straight. Those fine upstanding Roman Catholic pedophile priests!
By RF
April 20, 2006 02:57 PM | Link to this
I take time every day to sit or stand completely still and silent usually in my garden, or the woods in the backyard, or the tree covered lane where Abby and I go for walks. The great outdoors are my cathedrals, the birds my choirs, the flowers my stained glass windows, the rustle of leaves my music.
Sounds like an Emily Dickinson poem or maybe Whitman. As a friend of mine once said,”I see more of God in the West VA mountains than I do in any church I’ve ever been in…” I see it in the big blue eyes of my soon to be ten year old and the green eyes of my sweet, sweet, baby boy, who’s eight. Spend an evening holding them and you’ll know God and understand his love. Man complicates him so very much. I suspect we grieve him with our conditions, what ifs, and wherefores, and nitpicky sin finding.
By Netbanker
April 20, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this
Since I’m already going to burn in hell I’ll admit that I have an actual spell book and an authentic Voodoo Doll from New Orleans. I picked up the doll because it had the rainblow/gay flag colors on it and when I read the little tag that said its purpose was “To marry a rich man” how could I not buy it?! The spell book is another Nola purchase from the same store with the title “The Official Office Voodoo Spell Book” great collection of hilarious spells to ‘punish’ or ‘control’ coworkers. So far not a single one has worked, but people get a good laugh when they see them on my book case along with my Budda statue, crystal wand, and push-pin pig.
By Renee
April 20, 2006 03:01 PM | Link to this
You love your daughter unconditionally, but if she rejects or disobeys your rules, she will be punished accordingly.
Punish, yes. Eternal punishment NO!! Surely, you agree there is a difference between the two? Additionally, if you have unconditional love for someone, why not show them the way without the threat technique (me or hell). The love is very conditional. It’s conditional upon your following of him, and implementation of his ways. Otherwise he turns his back to you and off to hell you go.
I just got the image of Kenny going to hell in the SouthPark movie LOL. Funny, but that is exactly what society believes and is taught today. So if God sends you to hell, does he still love you??? Is he sending you with love, saying good luck or better luck next time.
By The72John
April 20, 2006 03:04 PM | Link to this
The skies will NOT rain fire, the moon will NOT turn blood-red, and a tentacled beast will NOT emerge from the bowels of the Earth to devour us all
Well, darnit…what’s the POINT then?
By GOB
April 20, 2006 03:06 PM | Link to this
You’re basing your argument on the idea that I believe in an eternal life of flames, fires, ghouls, goblins, etc.,
Likewise, I love my child unconditionally. However, if she breaks a rule, she will be punished.
So what sort of punishment do you think god has in store for those who dont believe?
Also, when you punish your daughter, isnt the main reason so that she will learn not to make the same mistake again? To make the analogy work with god, he would have to punish us while we are alive so we can learn from our mistakes.
By The72John
April 20, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this
HMMMMMM…this is a book written by a guy who is homosexual AND a former Roman Catholic Priest! Yeah, HE ought to have HIS facts straight. Those fine upstanding Roman Catholic pedophile priests
Oh, Looook. Another ignorant t** of a lurker who confuses pedophilia with homosexuality.
Go back under your redneck rock, lurker.
By Jack
April 20, 2006 03:09 PM | Link to this
I turned my son on to “Brave New World” when he was in 5th grade. Blew him away.
By Just Being Me
April 20, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this
JAP - I know quite a few Jews who accept Jesus, and I believe that those who live the life God expects them to live will receive the reward He’s promised to them.
Monica - Thanks! I gave it a shot…
Mara - Do you think that she’d be able to truly grasp the enormity of the punishment? Is man, with his limited ability to grasp the concept of “eternity” in any different strait than your daughter would be?
My daughter is 15, so I’m sure she could grasp that idea. However, I don’t want her to tell the truth so that she avoids punishment. I want her to tell the truth because (1) I said so; (2) it’s the right thing to do; and (3) she’ll be rewarded for doing the right thing.
I think God may feel the same way (maybe). We don’t need (or at least, I don’t) to be able to grasp what eternity is like because He doesn’t want us to embrace Him because we’re fearful of eternal damnation. God is not like chuck, not at all. Not even close. He doesn’t try to scare us into loving Him or accepting Him.
So, to answer your question clearly, I don’t think God expects us to grasp the concept of eternity. And, I don’t think it’s necessary to.
I haven’t studied hell and the book of Revelations thoroughly, so I’m not really sure what God’s purpose was in revealing the concept of hell to John, or why it was included in the Bible. I may never know.
All I know is that I’m not focused on the punishment, I’m focused on the reward.
Brian Curtis: So, for those of you following the Bible… What makes you so sure YOU’VE got it right? Or that ANYONE has?
I’m not so sure I’ve got it right, but I pray consistently for guidance and instruction; and for correction when I’m wrong. The best thing working for me is that I seek to have the “heart” of God, so to speak (I certainly don’t mean to imply I am God or equate myself to Him or my heart to His). I know that even if I don’t have all my facts straight, I’m still living right and doing right every day.
I gave my life to Christ at 13, of my own volition. During the first ten years or so of my Christian walk, I followed my “teachers” (mom, pastor, sunday school teacher, church mothers, mentors, etc) blindly. I did check what they said with scriptures, but I didn’t have the experience or the knowledge to comprehend the scriptures. Accordingly, I refused to wear pants, makeup, certain types of jewelry, didn’t go to movies, believed homosexuality was sinful, women shouldn’t be preachers, and all kinds of other foolishness.
I will be the first to tell you that we don’t “all” have it right. Actually, I’ll venture to say that the vast majority of Christians have it wrong. But, we are responsible for studying the Word for ourselves so that we will know (to the best of our ability) what is the good and perfect will of God for our lives.
Again, I wouldn’t say that I’m so sure I’m the one who’s right and everyone else is wrong. But, there is no doubt in my mind (not even an ounce) that God is real, and that one day all my questions will be answered.
By Jack
April 20, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this
We’re going to be done in by a rogue meteor. (Party down folks, we may not have much time.)
By Netbanker
April 20, 2006 03:23 PM | Link to this
Sounds like an Emily Dickinson poem or maybe Whitman. I PROMISE that I did not plagarize and wrote that all on my own. OH…the blue eyed 10yo…how was his trip to space camp?
Mara…borrowed or not that was an excellent description.
Come on, people; if your kids start waving sticks around and quoting Latin… what are you afraid is going to happen, exactly? BC…after falling down because their kid is actually saying something in Latin…NOTHING will happen because the kid is a muggle and muggles with wands still can’t cast a spell because muggles are not magical in any sense. Second EVERYONE knows that a wand and a stick are not the same thing. You have to have a WAND to cast a spell and even if they’re both technically wooden sticks wands need to have a phoenix feather or unicorn hair or something magical inside them to work. Sheesh! I’ll bet the same people think you can just hop on any old broom and fly!!
By Tim
April 20, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this
seeing as I was addressing LOZEN and not ROBERT… I’ll continue to refer the book to you Ma… seeing as in your post you were talking about the use of the word abomination in Leviticus… there were some interesting things in the book about that… he went back to the ORIGINAL text and discussed the word that was used for abomination
By The72John
April 20, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this
I haven’t studied hell and the book of Revelations thoroughly, so I’m not really sure what God’s purpose was in revealing the concept of hell to John, or why it was included in the Bible. I may never know.
Here’s the problem, JBM…the concept of hell predates Christianity…it’s not a “new” concept, and in fact the word derives from Norse Mythology - Hel, the underworld.
By Mara
April 20, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this
I was corrupted by the magic in “The Velveteen Rabbit” LOL!!
By RF
April 20, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this
Jack- have your read or seen anything about the biblical code? Apparently, it’s predicting a meteor strike 2012. That’s shortly after a predicted major L.A. earthquake in 2010. Who knows??
By Just Being Me
April 20, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this
Hmmm, Robert. Those comments are SO familiar to me. In fact, didn’t you say that exact same thing to me a few months ago??? I’d have to care enough to go through the archives to find the real name of “Robert”…. I so clearly remember that comment… you accused me of providing false information about Helminiak…
Renee: Additionally, if you have unconditional love for someone, why not show them the way without the threat technique (me or hell).
God doesn’t use the threat technique, chuck-a-like’s do. God depends on his followers to “show people the way” without all the threats.
The love is very conditional. It’s conditional upon your following of him, and implementation of his ways. Otherwise he turns his back to you and off to hell you go.
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree here. His love doesn’t change when you choose not to follow Him. He loves atheists, Saddam Hussein, Ghandi, chuck-a-likes and Muhammad just as much as He loves you and me. I will agree that His rewards and punishment is conditional, but I can’t agree that His love is.
So if God sends you to hell, does he still love you??? Is he sending you with love, saying good luck or better luck next time.
He’s not “sending” you anywhere. You choose hell, just like you choose salvation.
Gob
So what sort of punishment do you think god has in store for those who dont believe?
I’m not sure.
Also, when you punish your daughter, isnt the main reason so that she will learn not to make the same mistake again? To make the analogy work with god, he would have to punish us while we are alive so we can learn from our mistakes.
Yes, that’s the main reason. God does punish us while we’re alive. He provides correction, instruction, and chastising. He gives us grace, mercy, and love to sustain us while we work on living a life that’s pleasing to Him.
By RF
April 20, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this
Net- he LOVED it! Called me on the cell phone every night just high on life. I was a nervous wreck until I heard from him the first time. He came home sooooo tired and whiny!!
Sheesh! I’ll bet the same people think you can just hop on any old broom and fly!! Shhhh, don’t tell my eight year old. He’s convinced his second grade teacher can!!LOL Actually, I wouldn’t be surprised. She does does have a look as if she knows something we don’t…
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
Come on, people; if your kids start waving sticks around and quoting Latin
now if we did not know Latin (and I sure do not), we either might think they are majorly possessed, or are merely filled with the Spirit, and are speaking in tongues.
By The72John
April 20, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
Come on, people; if your kids start waving sticks around and quoting Latin… what are you afraid is going to happen, exactly
I’d be afraid they were secretly training to become Jesuits…
By Tim
April 20, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this
I’ll bet the same people think you can just hop on any old broom and fly!!
I’m saving up for a Nimbus 2007
By Mara
April 20, 2006 03:43 PM | Link to this
Thanks Net. It’s one of the best descriptions of the journey into agnosticism that I’ve ever seen.
the kid is a muggle and muggles with wands still can’t cast a spell because muggles are not magical in any sense.
Maybe they’ve heard the stories of odd Uncle Merlin from two generations back and they don’t want to take any chances. LOL!!!
By Just Being Me
April 20, 2006 04:10 PM | Link to this
I know NetB already asked this, but would you approve of the Chronicles of Narnia for your daughter?
I haven’t read it, and am embarassed to say I have no idea what it’s about.
I guess what I dont understand about this kind of argument (it has witches/wizards, etc) is that parents will let their kids watch all kinds of stuff on tv, have toy guns and swords and that kind of thing, and not worry that their kid is going to go shoot or stab someone. Why do you trust your kid with that, but not with a book. If a kid is smart enough to know that, even though they have a fake plastic sword (or even golf club or baseball bat), they shouldnt stab people or hit them with a bat, then shouldnt they be smart enough to know that what they read in a clearly fictional book isnt real?
I don’t allow my child to watch anything on TV that I don’t approve of. The only place that I’ve kinda lowered my standards is with music videos. Other than that, I don’t let her watch anything that I don’t approve of.
I had a hard time following all the HP remarks to me… I just lost track. But, someone said something about the importance of reading, and I want to respond that I highly stress the importance of reading in my house. I make my child read newspapers and several articles in Black Enterprise every month, in addition to the books she reads on her own. She happens to love an author named Stephanie Perry Moore, who writes Christian fiction for teens/pre-teens. I had never heard of this lady until my daughter came home with one of her books one day. She selected it on her own, and I support her choice because I believe strongly in keeping my dollars in my community.
I doubt I would prevent her from reading HP if she wanted to, simply because of her age. But, I’m not going to introduce it to her or require her to read it. Frankly, I don’t think she’s really interested in HP anyway… how popular is he with urban black audiences? (honest question, I don’t hear much talk about him in my community…)
The “witchcraft” and “wizardry” of HP is in no way related to the Christian idea of witchcraft, i.e. selling one’s soul to the Devil in return for power.
That’s not the extent of the “christian idea of witchcraft,” John. You don’t have to sell your soul to the devil (whatever that means) in order to be involved in what christians call witchcraft. Christians believe that utilizing any deity, force, or power other than that of God is witchcraft.
JBM, while you certainly have the right to read what you want, and have your child read only what you approve, I urge you to reconsider. The books have sparked an incredible love of reading in children around the world…
If she’s interested in reading it, I’ll let her read one and then we’ll talk about it. But, please know that my child already has a love for reading. That just may not be her preferred genre, and it certainly isn’t mine.
Don’t believe the hype, or the anti-hype in this case. See for yourself.
Point taken. But, how do I “see for myself” if I don’t want to read it? I’m not scared, or indoctrinated; I’m just not interested. I have a certain preference for novels, and this isn’t one of my interests.
By lozen
April 20, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this
Net, The great outdoors are my cathedrals, the birds my choirs, the flowers my stained glass windows, the rustle of leaves my music. Abby is my living example of unconditional love, finding joy in simple things, and approaching both whole heartedly, with your entire being. How very lovely! I agree. If our four legged relatives can’t go to heaven, I don’t want to go. If some good woman is thrown into hell because she never took jesus as her savior, I don’t want to be there either. I was listening to old Joni Mitchell albums last night, incense wafting through the air (oh oh, another abomination!) candles glowing, planting moon flowers for the garden, and I realized Joni has more spiritual message for me than anything I have ever read in the bible. Her message relates to my life. The bible doesn’t.
By Robert
April 20, 2006 04:28 PM | Link to this
Hitler was actually a roman catholic and the catholic church was a fine supporter of his. Go online and you can see all the photos of him and the bishops/future popes,etc. All nice and cozy.
He was just treating the Jewish people the way the catholic church treated them for centuries. I’ll bet you didn’t know the catholic church was the first ones to ever put Jews in the “ghettos”. Look it up for yourselves.
Hitler is where all the popes are…roasting marshmellows in hades. except instead of marshmellows you probably get something like grubworms.
By lozen
April 20, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this
Okay, youse guys. You know if (and that’s a big IF) chuck has a long thing, he wouldn’t be sharing it with me!
By The72John
April 20, 2006 05:02 PM | Link to this
Point taken. But, how do I “see for myself” if I don’t want to read it? I’m not scared, or indoctrinated; I’m just not interested. I have a certain preference for novels, and this isn’t one of my interests
Well, if THAT’S your only reason, then I certainly understand. My mother has tried to read them, on the recommendations of me, my father, my sister, my other sister, my neice and my nephew, all of whom love the books, but she hates fantasy.
By Chilao
April 20, 2006 05:07 PM | Link to this
and this isn’t one of my interests(HP)
same boat I am in, not into that fantasy type stuff either. I like a different kind of read.
A friend got the first one to read to his daughter and now he buys two copies when they come out, one for him and one for her, since she now old enough to read her own. He LOVES them and recommends them but I am not interested.
The Narnia books are by C.S. Lewis, a British Christian author. My dad had all his books, but I never read any nor did I see the movie. Have not been into that sort of thing since the movie The Dark Crystal which was a long time ago. mid 80/s. LOL
By lozen
April 20, 2006 05:14 PM | Link to this
Yes, mara, yes, “I have far greater confidence in the people who admit there are lots of concepts they’re uncertain of than I am those who are sure they’ve got it all nailed down. There’s nothing to be ashamed of in admitting we’re still in the process of learning and becoming.” But I’m still gritting my teeth and balling my hands up in fists to keep from believing while I read this book on Feng Shui!
By Chilao
April 21, 2006 08:56 AM | Link to this
A man walks into a bar, and orders a beer. He drinks the beer, then stands on the bar, drops his pants and p!sses all over the place. The bar tender freaks out. “You dirty disgusting pig! How dare you come into my bar and urinate! I’ll beat the sh!t out of you…”
The man begins crying. “I’m sorry! Its ruining my life. I can’t sleep. I do it every time I have a drink! It’s worrying me to death, please don’t hit me…”
The bar tender takes pity. “Look, I have a brother who is a psychiatrist,here’s his card, why don’t you see him?”
The man hugs the bartender, shakes his hand and leaves with a thousand thank yous…
Six months later, the man walks into the bar, and orders a drink. The bartender says, “Okay, here you go… Wait! Weren’t you that guy who..”
“Yes, And I went and saw your brother. He is fantastic, I am completely cured.”
“Well, that’s great. This beer is on the house.”
So the man drinks the beer, stands on the bar, drops his trousers and p!sses on the bar.
“You b!stard! I thought you said you were cured!”
“I am! It doesn’t bother me anymore…”
By Chilao
April 21, 2006 08:59 AM | Link to this
It had promised to be a sensational divorce case, with the wife accused of incredible escapades. Testifying before her own attorney, she projected an image of sweet innocence, told a tale of wifely fidelity and sacrifice, and was quite believable.
When it was time for cross-examination though, the husband’s lawyer arose and said, “Isn’t it true that on the night of June 12, in a driving rainstorm, you had sexual intercourse with a certain circus midget on the handle bars of a careening motorcycle as it raced across a private golf course reaching speeds in excess of seventy-five miles per hour?”
She turned pale but retained her remarkable self-control and composure. Her voice was almost serene in its innocence as she asked, “What was that date again ?”
By chuck
April 21, 2006 08:59 AM | Link to this
God doesn’t use “scare tactics” JBM? These are the words of Jesus Himself in Matthew 24:
29Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
31And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.
32Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
33So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
34Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
35Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
36But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
37But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
40Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
41Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
42Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.
43But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.
44Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.
45Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?
46Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.
47Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods.
48But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming;
49And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken;
**50The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of,
51And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.**
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 21, 2006 09:04 AM | Link to this
Robert, stop trying to start a holy war on the blog! The Catholic church was not the first to put Jews in ghettos. King Ferdinand of Spain is accepted as the first to establish Jewish ghettos when he took control of Italy by defeating Naples of France in 1510. It’s largely believed that he established the ghetto in Venice which is where most of the Jews in Italy lived anyway during that time period.
By Chilao
April 21, 2006 09:04 AM | Link to this
A man decides to have a party and invites lots of people, telling them to bring their friends. On the invitation he puts “Theme Party-Come as a Human Emotion.”
On the night of the party, the first guest arrives. He opens the door to see a guy covered in green paint with the letters N and V painted on his chest. He says to this guy, “Wow, great outfit, what emotion have you come as?” The guy says, “I’m green with envy.”
The host replies, “Brilliant, come on in and have a drink.”
A few minutes later the next guest arrives and the host opens the door to see a woman covered in a pink body stocking with a feather bow wrapped round her most intimate parts. He says to this woman, “Wow, great outfit, what emotion have you come as?” And she replies, “I’m tickled pink.” The host says, “I love it! Come on in and join the party.”
A couple of minutes later the doorbell rings for the third time, and the host opens the door to see two guys from New York, stark naked, one with his p!nis stuck in a bowl of custard and the other with his p!nis stuck in a pear. The host is really shocked and says, “Guys, what the hell are you doing? You could get arrested for standing like that out there in the street. What emotion is this supposed to be?” The first guy replies, “Well, I’m effin’ dis custid, and my friend here has come in dispair.”
Anybooy see those Anne of Green Gables series on PBS?, she reads so many dime-store-novels, she uses terms like “I was filled with the depths of despair”. LOL (Prince Edward Island, 1900 or so)
By RF
April 21, 2006 09:04 AM | Link to this
there’s some weeping and gnashing of teeth going on over here today. Progress report day, and the little crumb munchers aren’t happy!!
By Chilao
April 21, 2006 09:09 AM | Link to this
(this may be a repeat here, may have been posted by someone else sometime ago, my apologies, if…)
There was this virgin that was going out on a date for the first time and she told her grandmother about it. So, the grandmother says sit here and let me tell you about those young boys. He is going to try to kiss you, you are going to like that but, don’t let him do that. He is going to try to feel your breast, you are going to like that but, don’t let him do that. He is going to try to put his hand between your legs , you are going to like that but, don’t let him do that. But most important, he is going to try to get on top of you and have his way with you. You are going to like that but, don’t let him do that, it will disgrace the family. With that bit of advise, the granddaughter went on her date and could not wait to tell her grandmother about it. So, the next day she told her grandmother that her date went just like she said. But she said “grandmother I didn’t let him disgrace the family. When he tried I turned over, got on top of him and disgraced his family!”
By chuck
April 21, 2006 09:12 AM | Link to this
Got a few of those myself RF
By Chilao
April 21, 2006 09:12 AM | Link to this
12 MORE MINUTES…
A policeman was patrolling near midnight at a local parking spot overlooking a golf course. He drove by a car and saw a couple inside with the light on. The policeman walked over to the car where he saw young man in the driver’s seat reading a computer magazine and a young lady in the back seat calmly knitting.
He stopped to investigate. He walked up to the driver’s window and knocked. The young man looked up, cracked the window and said, “Yes, officer?” “What are you doing?” the policeman asked.
“What does it look like?” answered the young man. “I’m reading this magazine.” Pointing towards the young lady in the back seat, the officer then asked, “And what is she doing?” The young man looked over his shoulder and replied, “I think she is knitting a sweater.”
Confused, the officer asked, “How old are you young man?” “I’m nineteen,” he replied. “And how old is she?” asked the officer.
The young man looked at his watch and said, “Well, in about twelve minutes she’ll be eighteen.”
RF - does that mean you will have to deal with a ton of screaming parents come Monday? LOL Good Luck!
By chuck
April 21, 2006 09:16 AM | Link to this
BTW JaP, King Ferdinand served under divine appointment from the Catholic Church. He was fighting his own holy war with the Moors and his motivation for financing Columbus was to spread Catholocism to any indigenous people he found.
By chuck
April 21, 2006 09:30 AM | Link to this
I was talking about the parents Chilao. Mine went home yesterday.
By GOB
April 21, 2006 09:32 AM | Link to this
Chuck - That must be one really long generation…
By Monica
April 21, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this
RF, see if this sounds familiar… “I know that I didn’t turn in my term paper, but is there anyting I can do for extra credit?”
Can’t wait til the bell rings today!!
Chilao, your comment the other day about naming a kid Jesus Christ reminded me of a Bill Cosby story. He said he thought his name was Jesus Christ and his brother’s name was dammit. His dad would go around the house screaming, “Dammit, get in here!”, or “Jesus Christ, sit down!” One day he was playing in the rain. His dad said, “Dammit, get in the house!” He replied, “But Dad, I’m Jesus Christ!”
By chuck
April 21, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this
Gob,
This is from one of many commentaries on thverse you referred to. You can see what other scholars said about them at crosswalk.com
34, 35. This generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled. Some hold that “all these things,” in verse 33 and 34, refer only to what was said of the fall of Jerusalem, ending with verse 28. Others have contended that the phrase includes the second coming, but refers directly to the end of Jerusalem, which was a type of the end of the world. I believe, rather, that “all these things” embraces all thus far predicted, and that “this generation” means the Jewish race, instead of only those then living. The Greek word so rendered is used in the sense of race in the Greek classics, and as examples of such use in the New Testament,
By Netbanker
April 21, 2006 10:02 AM | Link to this
RF…good to hear he had a good time even if he came home a little whiny. Why does it seem that camp is primarily for childhood (first and second)? I loved it as a kid and wouldn’t mind doing something like space camp now. I supposed I’ll have to wait until I’m retired to enjoy Elder Hostle like my parents.
Hmmmm…sounds more like Lack of Progress Report day based on the comments so far. Chuck, Monica, RF…best of luck today and next week after the parents see how their lil darlings are progressing in school.
This comment in The Vent seemed appropriate based on our conversations this week: “Scientists believe there are more planets in the universe than grains of sand on all the beaches of all the oceans of the Earth. And here I get stuck on the one dominated by fear, superstition and ignorance. Bummer!”
Tim…the Nimbus series is sooooo over rated. Besides, just like a car you never want to get the first batch of new brooms until they’ve had the kinks worked out. That’s why it may be generations old, but I’ll stick with tried and true broomstick I inherited from my Great Grandma. I just wish I could break that spell that only allows flying at night so I wouldn’t have to deal with traffic on the perimeter and spaghetti junction every day. Oh well.
By RF
April 21, 2006 10:10 AM | Link to this
Monica- I LOVE Bill Cosby’s routines about his childhood and raising his own kids. My parents have some of the albums, and we get them out once in a while when we’re over there for a laugh. My boys get a kick out of the vinyl albums. God are we THAT old??
Chilao- I teach remedial kids so I very rarely hear from a parent. I have the parents who were either teens when they became parents or they’re just glad little Johnny’s not in jail yet. I wish a few would call!
By Jack
April 21, 2006 10:19 AM | Link to this
“My parents have some of the albums” Geez, I have some of his albums. I like the story about the baby buggie wheels.
By RF
April 21, 2006 10:23 AM | Link to this
Net- at least yours doesn’t require wearing the silly hat. I use mom’s every now and then, but she has the doggone safety switch that won’t allow you to start it until the pointy black hat is securely in place. And I can’t stand to fly with her— she goes so slowly and carefully so she doesn’t scare any of the birds. We’re thinking about grounding her, but she threatens to turn us all into toads or cockroaches, so we just keep letting her fly— slow lane with the signal on alllll the time. LOL
By GOB
April 21, 2006 10:23 AM | Link to this
Chuck - I have heard those interpretations as well, but it seems to me that if you are willing to try to interpret things to fit the current situation (i.e. The second coming hasnt happened yet…well, that we know of…plenty of people claim to be the second coming, but we tend to kill most of them, so historically, maybe we will see it just happened again), then why cant you do that with any verse in the bible? With that kind of reading, pretty much anything can twisted to mean whatever you want.
Also, the idea of going back to the original text is pretty meaningless when you are quoting Jesus. Since the earliest gospel in the new testament was written 30 years after Jesus’ death, we cant know what he really said anyway. And because the gospels built on each other (and other shared documents; Q, M etc) as time progressed the actual words seem pretty unimportant. The underlying ideas can still be read, but I have always found that using exact qoutes to prove a point is pretty lame.
By Chilao
April 21, 2006 10:25 AM | Link to this
Monica - don’t think I made that comment(just searched) Gob did, but brings up an interesting point. Protestants would consider it sacrilege to name their kid “Jesus” but it is quite acceptable for Catholics/Spanish at least, with all the “Hehzeuses” out there.
I was not going to argue with Robert over Hitler’s religious beliefs, we all have our own perception of history, I just thought it common knowledge Hitler was an atheist, but may have been raised Catholic. Never read Mein Kampf, LOL(but did read Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, it just a just-the-facts, ma’am kinda book). But if you live your life being extremely anti-Catholic, probably nice to be able to consider Hitler Catholic. LOL
on that thought, a great movie a few years ago was that one Martin Luther which dealt with the reaction to his posting the theses on the church wall. According to my mother, there was one in the 1940s(B/W), that dealt more with the Detail of the items (90 or so) posted on the wall. should not say ‘according to her’ as there was one, I looked it up after she told me about it.
Chuck - so that means your screaming parents calls/visit are starting now, today? LOL
Lozen - better watch that Feng Shui religion stuff, I have it on good authority it of the Devil. LMAO and j/k
By Robert
April 21, 2006 10:25 AM | Link to this
To: Jewish and proud….you my kind sir are mistaken.
Constantine (the catholic) imposed heavy penalties on anyone who visited a pagan temple or converted to Judaism. Mixed marriages between Jews and Christians were punished by death. In the Codex Theodosianus of Theodosis II (408-450), it forbade Jews to hold any public office. It first came from Justinian (the catholic) who legalized the burning and pillaging of Jewish synagogues by Catholic bishops and monks (often canonized later). Thomas Aquinas (the catholic), in the treatise De regimine Judaeorum ad Ducissam Brabantae, made it acceptable for popes and kings to dispose of property belonging to the Jews.
Compelling Jews to wear yellow badges came from an invention of the Catholic Church. The Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 set up the Inquisition along with enforcement of Jews wearing a yellow spot on their clothes and a horned cap (pileum cornutum) to mark them as the murderers of Christ and to remind them of their descent from the devil.
During the Black Death plague which ravaged Europe in the 14th century, the Catholic clergy aimed its blame at the Jews claiming they worked for the Devil and had poisoned the wells and springs. Their extermination compares with the pogroms that took place in the 20th century under Hitler.
During the Spanish Inquisition, the Catholic Church directed its actions against the baptized Jews, the marranos. They forbade them to hold any office in the Church or the state; many suffered torture or death.
Popes have traditionally supported anti-Jewish acts and beliefs. Pope Paul IV in the sixteenth century established the Roman ghetto (another Catholic invention). For more than two centuries afterward, Catholics humiliated the Roman Jews and degraded them at the annual carnival. In the same century, Pope Gregory XIII instituted enforced Christian sermons insulting Judaism.
Forcing Jews, and heretics into the Catholic faith, of course has always served as a hallmark of Catholicism. When they could not legally use strong-arm tactics they used propaganda. Although most people associate the term with Hitler, propaganda actually came as an invention by the Catholics long before the Nazis, from the Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide, an organization established by Pope Gregory XV in 1622.
In the 1930s, as the Catholic leaders listened to Hitler’s rhetoric against the Jews during his appeal for power, his speeches condemning Jews only correlated with the Church’s own long history of Jewish hatred.
Indeed, in Hitler’s meeting with Bishop Berning and Monsignor Steinmann on April 26, 1933, Hilter reminded his Catholic guests that the Church, for 1,500 years had regarded the Jews as parasites, had banished them into ghettos, and had forbidden Christians to work for them. Hitler said he merely intended to do more effectively what the Church had attempted to accomplish for so long.
By Chilao
April 21, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this
Lozen - that of the Devil comment had the accent of an upper Appalachian preacher. LOL. Coworker listens to whatever on his headphones and one day he got on the phone, and for some reason it started coming out through his speakers. I let him know quickly I had no intention of being on any job where I was listening to some hillbilly hick Pentacostal preacher preaching away, since that was what he had been listening to. LOL
oh, I should say, does this woman who is against the HP books actually feel threatened by something like that? does that indicate religious insecurities on her part? LOL
By Monica
April 21, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this
Okay, that’s twice this week I have addressed the wrong person. Sorry! It’s definitely time for a weekend! Not that my weekends are exciting by some standards, but tomorrow will involve a T-ball game!
By Robert
April 21, 2006 10:39 AM | Link to this
Also, to: Jewish and proud…
In 1917, Eugenio Pacelli, later to become Pope Pius XII, resided in a nunciature in Munich, directly opposite to what was later to become the Brown House, the cradle of Nazism. There he showed his first inkling of his unsympathetic feelings toward the Jews when he refused to come to the assistance of Jews and calling them a “Jewish cult.”. In the 1920s Pacelli presented his credentials to the Weimer government where he stated, “For my part, I will devote my entire strength to cultivating and strengthening the relations between the Holy See and Germany.” Pacelli’s stay in Germany with his familiarity with their political, religious, and racist views must have influenced his later work to unify Catholicism with Germany.
In Italy, the Holy See signed a pact (drafted by Pacelli’s brother and Pietro Gasparri) with Mussolini in February 1929, known as the Lateran Treaty. Hitler had taken note of the Lateran Treaty and hoped for an identical agreement for his future regime. The Vatican encouraged priests to support the Fascists and the Pope spoke of Mussolini as “a man sent by Providence.”
The CatholicChurch has a history of pacts with criminal states as the Holy See signed treaties with monarchs and governments regardless of slavery, inhumanity, or torture they may have induced upon fellow human beings. Even Mussolini’s attack on Ethiopia on October 3, 1935 was not condemned by the Holy See. Nor did Pius XI restrain the Italian hierarchy from war enthusiasm.
In the 1930s, Pacelli and his associates negotiated with the Nazis to form a contract which got signed in 1933 as the Reich Concordat with the approval of the Pope. Note that the Catholic hierarchy believes in the infallibility of Popes in matters of faith and morals (ever since the First Vatican Council of 1870). This Concordat with its Papal infallible authority had arguably neutralized the potential of 23 million Catholics to protest and resist and which helped Hitler into legal dictatorship.
After the agreement, Hitler, mimicking Pacelli fourteen years earlier stated, “I will devote my entire strength to cultivating and strengthening the relations between the Holy See and Germany.” (Hitler, spent more time and effort on the concordat with Pacelli than on any other treaty in the entire era of the Third Reich [Cornwell, p. 150]).
This Concordat gave Germany an opportunity to create an area of trust with the Catholic Church and gave significance to the developing struggle against international Jewry. This papal endorsement of Nazism helped seal the fate of Europe which makes it plausible that these Catholic prejudices bolstered aspects of Nazi anti-Semitism.
The Concordat and the following Jewish persecutions resulted in the silence of the Pope and the bishops.Cardinal Faulhaber of Munich, referring to the Nazi attacks on the Jews, wrote to Pacelli, confirming that protest proved pointless since it could only extend the struggle to Catholics. He told Pacelli, “Jews can help themselves.”
On April 25, thousands of Catholic priests across Germany became part of an anti-Semitic attestation bureaucracy, supplying details of blood purity through marriage and baptism registries in accordance with the Nazi Nuremberg laws which distinguished Jews from non-Jews. Catholic clerical compliance in the process would continue throughout the period of the Nazi regime.
Any claimed saving of all-too-few Jewish lives by a few brave Catholics must stand against the millions who died in the death camps as an indirect result of the official workings of the Catholic body.
By Chilao
April 21, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this
can we discuss Oliver Cromwell’s persection of all Non-Puritans while we are at it? The English were sure glad when he was no longer the ruler of England. LMAO or even better, why Roger WIlliams had to go form the Rhode Island colony.
We recently went on Sarbannes-Oxley, and to circumvent some restrictions, burned all our source code to a CD(just for us programmers). and then I made the remark to one, when he was looking at contents of CD, “Quick, put it away, I hear the hooves of the King’s Horsemen approaching”.
Jack - NO, I was NOT seeing B/W 1940s movies, first run, okay? not THAT old, OKAY? LOL (beating you to it)
By Chilao
April 21, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this
Monica - de nada
By Robert
April 21, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this
To: Jewish and proud…
After the death of Pius XI, the electoral procedure to elect another pope had begun. The March 1939 election favored Pacelli and four days later, Pacelli made it clear that he would handle all German affairs personally.
He proposed the following affirmation of Hitler:
To the Illustrious Herr Adolf Hitler, Fuhrer and Chancellor of the German Reich! Here at the beginning of Our Pontificate We wish to assure you that We remain devoted to the spiritual welfare of the German people entrusted to your leadership…. During the many years we spent in Germany, We did all in Our power to establish harmonious relations between Church and State. Now that the responsibilities of Our pastoral function have increased Our opportunities, how much more ardently do We pray to reach that goal. May the prosperity of the German people and their progress in every domain come, with God’s help, to fruition!
Pacelli became a crowned Pope on March 12, 1939 (Pius XII). The following month on April 20, 1939, at Pacelli’s express wish, Archbishop Orsenigo, the nuncio in Berlin, opened a gala reception for Hitler’s fiftieth birthday. The birthday greetings thus initiated by Pacelli immediately became a tradition; each April 20 during the few years left to Hitler and his Reich, Cardinal Bertram of Berlin would send “warmest congratulations to the Fuhrer in the name of the bishops and the dioceses in Germany,” to which he added “fervent prayers which the Catholics in Germany are sending to heaven on their altars.”
By this time Pacelli could call on the loyalty and devotion of a half-billion people, of which half the populations of Hitler’s new Reich had become Catholics, including a quarter of the SS. At this time bishops, clergy, religious, and faithful had bound themselves to the Pope, and by his own self estimation, served as the supreme arbiter of moral values on earth.
Throughout the war, not only did Catholic priests pay homage to Hitler and contribute to the anti-Semitic feelings, several priests also protected Nazis from criminal charges.
For example, Nazi sympathizers such as Bishop Alois Hudal helped Nazi criminals escape to South America by assisting them with false papers and hiding places in Rome. Father Dragonovic worked with the U.S. Army’s Counter Intelligence Corps (CIC) to organize the escape of the Nazi war criminal Klaus Barbie to South America. Barbie had also lived under Dragonovic’s protection in San Girolamo for about a year.
So, NO of course the catholic church had NOTHING to do with ADOLF HITLER whatsoever!!! …Yeah, right…
I’m done. I hope you have a better understanding of Hitler growing up as a good little catholic and learning how his “church” hated the Jewish people and put them in ghettos and made them wear yellow badges. He got those from the catholic church-they were not his original ideas. There is so much more to the story but I won’t post the rest and hope you’ll do your own research on the subject. The photos are also very compelling…Hitler and the popes/bishops/etc.
By Jack
April 21, 2006 10:53 AM | Link to this
T-Ball league is the most fun to watch and has the hottest Moms.
By GOB
April 21, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this
On the idea of possible sacrilege, yet funny, what if on Halloween, when kids rang your doorbell, you answered dressed like a preist and gave them communion wafers and said the whole “body of christ shed for you” bit. That would be high comedy, although the parents might not think so.
By Robert
April 21, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this
For a timeline since of catholic anti-semitism since the 3rd century see the following website.
http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/mine/timeline.htm
By Chilao
April 21, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this
body of christ shed for you….although the parents might not think so
Depends on the parents, have a sister with kids who would love it. might not let her kids actually do it, but to see kids at her door like that, well. LOL She currently has ‘problems’ with the parents of some of her kids’ friends, since she does not attend church, so obviously, to those parents, she is a bad parent. she could care, but…
By Renee
April 21, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this
Hilarious GOB!!!
By Julia
April 21, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this
Monica-we have a t-ball game tomorrow too! You’re not in Gwinnett County are you?
(Haven’t had much time to check the blog. We’ve had 2 co-workers funerals and it’s been really depressing at work to say the least.)
But it makes you appreciate how fortunate you are to be alive and healthy. I couldn’t wait to get home to my son yesterday and hug him. I am soooooooo glad it’s Friday!!!
By the way, I loved the Bill Cosby “dentist” skit.
By lozen
April 21, 2006 11:45 AM | Link to this
Renee, I am still thinking about your post where you said, Can’t I have my heaven now? I know we can. I wrote this one night this week:
Planting moon flower seeds in dark, rich earth, Magical metamorphosis soon brings, Sweet smelling, night blooming flowers. The saxophone on that new CD!!! Candlelight throwing shadows against the wall, A cat on my left side and a cat on my right…. Aw, heaven on earth, here and now!
Then when I got home from work yesterday I was greeted with the aroma of old fashioned pinks in my garden, a frog croaking in the rain spout, a mocking bird chasing a cat away from her nest and then that spectacular lightning storm that came and went away and came back again.
All we have is this moment. None of us know what tomorrow brings, but if we don’t enjoy this moment, chances are we won’t enjoy tomorrow either.
By lozen
April 21, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this
Robert, very interesting. Amazing how little we americans know about history isn’t it? Misquoting Jesus mentions the catholic vendetta against the jews as “the murderers of jesus”. Religion really does bring about so many good things in this world.
By Julia
April 21, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this
I thought it was supposed to be joke day?
(I could use a good laugh or two today!)
By Monica
April 21, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
Julia - Carroll County, not Gwinnett. There aren’t as many people out here (at least, not yet), and we like the slower pace!
By lozen
April 21, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this
People have been expecting jesus to come again and the world to end for how long now? The disciples thought it would come become they died. It didn’t. There have been how many sects and religious groups that have believed some preacher and walked away from their lives and everything they own only to wait for something that didn’t happen? I think whoever wrote Revelations must have taken datura or some hallucinogenic drug, and then sat and wrote it down! Or maybe he just ate too much before bedtime and had a really bad nightmare!
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 21, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this
Robert, you went WAYYYY beyond your original statement that it was the POPE that had FIRST established Jewish ghettos in Italy. The first ghetto established by a POPE was in 1555. The first Jewish ghetto EVER established was established by King Ferdinand in 1516 nearly 40 years before that set up by Pope Paul IV. That was the point I was trying to make. Believe me, you will get NO argument out of me that the Roman Catholic church’s policy towards Jews throughout much of history was deplorable and utterly hypocritical but doesn’t change the fact that the Pope was not the first person to set up Jewish ghettos.
By RF
April 21, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this
Julia- apparently everyone’s funny bone is broken today! (except Chilao) That, or the boss-man is demanding his eight hours! I feel like Eeyore today “Oh BOTHER”—I loved his voice as a kid.
Oh, I meant to tell you to go to Wal-Mart and in the toy section they have the Disney classics CD’s. GREAT songs from the Disney movies. My boys LOVE them. Much better than listening to the radio these days!
By RF
April 21, 2006 12:10 PM | Link to this
Monica- I lived in Douglas county for years, but I teach on the southside now, so I moved. I miss the pretty countryside out there, although there isn’t much in Douglas anymore!
By lozen
April 21, 2006 12:16 PM | Link to this
Anybody remember an old, old joke about a wallet made from foreskins?
By Chilao
April 21, 2006 12:24 PM | Link to this
I always thought the guy who wrote Revelations(John) was on some serious drugs, they were used back then you know. that not just a ’60s’ thing. LOL
maybe drinking that hashish tea?
By Monica
April 21, 2006 12:43 PM | Link to this
RF - I grew up in Douglas County and lived there until 5 years ago. This is my first year teaching in another county. Wonder if we know each other?
By Renee
April 21, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this
lozen - good 11:45
RF - yes, my nose is to the grindstone today (to put it mildly)
By lozen
April 21, 2006 01:05 PM | Link to this
The Mother Superior tells three nuns that before they can receive their Saint name they have one final test. She tells them to go commit one sin so that they would not have urges to be bad. After the three nuns return, the Mother Superior says, “Did you commit your sins?” They all shake their heads yes. The first two nuns are crying, the third is giggling. The Mother Superior says to the first one, “What sin did you commit child?” The first nun answers with tears in her eyes. “I was just rotten, I picked flowers from someone’s garden.” The Mother Superior says, “Go drink the Holy Water and it will be alright.” The third nun is dancing around in laughter. The Mother Superior asks the second one. Her whole body is shaking and she is crying. “I stole candy from a baby.” The Mother Superior says, “My child, drink the Holy Water and you are forgiven. The third nun falls on the floor hysterically laughing. The Mother Superior is disgusted and asks, “What are you laughing at?” The third nun is barely able to answer through her tears of laughter, “I peed in the Holy Water.”
By lozen
April 21, 2006 01:07 PM | Link to this
One fine sunny morning, the priest took a walk in the local forest. He had been walking by the small stream when he noticed a sad, sad looking frog sitting on a toadstool. “What’s wrong with you?” said the priest. “Well,” said the frog, “the reason I am so sad on this fine day is because I wasn’t always a frog.” “Really!” said the priest. “Can you explain!” “Once upon a time I was an 11 year old Choir boy at the local church. I too was walking through this forest when I was confronted by the wicked witch of the forest. ‘Let me pass!’ I yelled, but to no avail. She called me a cheeky little boy and with a flash of her wand, turned me into this frog you see before you.” “That’s an incredible story” said the priest. “Is there no way of reversing this spell that the witch has cast upon you?.” “Yes” said the frog, “It is said, that if a nice kind person would pick me up, take me home, give me food & Warmth and with a good nights sleep would wake up a boy once again.” “Today’s your lucky day!” said the priest, and picked up the frog and took him home. The priest gave the frog lots of food, placed him by the fire and at bedtime put the frog on the pillow beside him. When the priest awoke, he saw the 11-year-old Choirboy beside him in bed, “And that my lord is the case for the Defense……. “
By Jack
April 21, 2006 01:11 PM | Link to this
Lozen. Isn’t that where he made a wallet out of them and when you rub it it turns into a suitcase?
By chuck
April 21, 2006 01:13 PM | Link to this
For JUSTIN
A man and his wife were getting a divorce at a local court. But the custody of their child posed a problem.
The mother jumped to her feet and protested to the judge that since she had brought the child into this world, she should retain custody of them.
The man also wanted custody of his children. The judge asked for his side of the story too. After a long moment of silence, the man rose from his chair and replied, “Judge,when I put a dollar in a vending machine and a Pepsi comes out, does the Pepsi belong to me or to the machine?”
By chuck
April 21, 2006 01:23 PM | Link to this
For Gob
A little boy was overheard talking to himself as he strutted through the backyard, wearing his baseball cap and toting a ball and bat: “I’m the greatest hitter in the world,” he announced.
Then, he tossed the ball into the air, swung at it, and missed.
“Strike one!” he yelled. Undaunted, he picked up the ball and said again, “I’m the greatest hitter in the world!”
He tossed the ball into the air. When it came down he swung again and missed. “Strike two!” he cried.
The boy then paused a moment to examine his bat and ball carefully. He spit on his hands and rubbed them together. He straightened his cap and said once more, “I’m the greatest hitter in the world!”
Again he tossed the ball up in the air and swung at it. He missed. “Strike three!”
“Wow!” he exclaimed. “I’m the greatest pitcher in the world!”
By Netbanker
April 21, 2006 01:24 PM | Link to this
We’ve had 2 co-workers funerals Julia…GET OUT NOW! If your company is killing them off that quickly it’s only a matter of time. Save yourself! Just quietly stand up, look casual, and slowly make your way to the door.
Seriously though, I’m sorry to hear about your experiences. It’s tough to lose coworkers and friends.
Lozen..nice images. I just love moonflowers. I’m hoping to do some planting this weekend and should put in some of those to climb the deck posts by the pool. Wasn’t that storm great?! I was pulling weeds in the evening listening to God’s Drum Corps warm up for the main event later on.
Chilao..whoever wrote Revelations was on something a LOT stronger than hash tea. The imagery is way too acid/lsd for it to have been as mild as hash. Speaking of which a belated happy 420 to those who celebrate that holiday.
And speaking of belated holiday wishes….JAP…hope you had a good Passover. I was in S. Florida so I double holidayed last weekend between Passover and Easter.
By RF
April 21, 2006 01:38 PM | Link to this
Net and lozen— wasn’t the storm nice to hear coming. I sat in my front porch swing last night watching it roll in after the boys were off the Neverland. I’ve put out geraniums, portulaca (sp?) and snapdragons. My wild impatiens are coming in and I’ve got some annual impatiens to put out this weekend. I love this time of year when I get to play in the dirt grownup style!!
By Jack
April 21, 2006 01:50 PM | Link to this
What does a man do standing up, a woman do sitting down, and a dog do on three legs?
By Jack
April 21, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this
RF. No canibis?
By Monica
April 21, 2006 01:58 PM | Link to this
Jack - shake hands?
By RF
April 21, 2006 01:59 PM | Link to this
Monica- I lived in Bill Arp from 89-93, moved, came back in 97 and lived off of Stewart’s Mill until 2000. I’m ready to move further out now. The dang suburbanites are crowding me out again!! LOL I have a good friend who lives off of 166 near the Carroll line, and I miss being out there. It’s growing fast though.
By Jewish and Proud of It
April 21, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this
A belated “Thank You!” NetB. I had a wonderful Passover (even though we’re supposed to be solemn :) Seder was very good except for the gefilte fish (or as I call it, gefilthy fish). My nephew found the afikomen and was extremely proud of himslef. All inall, a great time was had by all. I trust your Easter was filed with merriment and joy…
By Jack
April 21, 2006 02:01 PM | Link to this
Shake hands.
By Julia
April 21, 2006 02:07 PM | Link to this
RF-thanks for the cd info. Actually, we have more kids cd’s in my car than anything else! We have alot of the kids songs cds with like 30 songs on each one. You know, all the little kids faves like “Row Row Row Your Boat”. Plus the cds from cartoons like Dragon Tales and Jay Jay the Jet Plane.
Broken funny bones…now that’s funny.
Jack-t-ball moms huh? Thanks.
By RF
April 21, 2006 02:07 PM | Link to this
Jack- you NEVER admit to that!! LOL Has to be planted carefully so it blends in. I grew up with a couple of guys who thought they were soooo slick. They had a rather good size patch of it going in the woods, which they watered from their swimming pool. Only problem is they forgot to put the hose up one day, and dad came home, saw the hose, followed it, and you can guess the rest!!
By Jack
April 21, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this
Julia. :)
By lozen
April 21, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this
There was this newly arrived novitiate,young,fresh and eager to please, who was summoned by her Mother Superior to assist the aging Sr. Maureen on her daily round of errands in the local village.. So ‘tis off they go with young Sr. Bridget studiously taking note of each and every road and stop they made as they pedaled their way about,on the convents two ancient bicycles.After a time they finished their tasks and stopped for a spell for the customary cup o’ tay. Upon heading back to the convent, Sr Bridget took the lead only to find that a road they had taken was now impassable, due to heavy repairs going on.Sr Maureen tells her not to worry she knows another way, so off they go again winding and careening down some obscure back roads in a manner that gives young Sr. Bridget cause for concern. Somewhat breathlessly she calls out to Sr Maureen and says “I’ve never come this way before”. “Don’t you be alarmed now” says Sr. Maureen ” ‘Tis those lovely cobble stones…..”
By chuck
April 21, 2006 02:20 PM | Link to this
For Boscoe
A drunken man staggers in to a Catholic church and sits down in a confession box and says nothing.
The bewildered priest coughs to attract his 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’ mate, there’s no paper in this one either.”
By Monica
April 21, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this
RF- I lived in Bill Arp myself! My parents moved to Arbor Station in ‘92 (I was away at college from 89-94 but was home in the summer and worked at S.F.O.G.), and they too have migrated to Carroll. My husband and I lived in the Bill Arp area after we married, then moved to Carroll after our oldest was born. I wanted my children to have a safe place to play, and unfortunately our neighborhood wasn’t it. The mall ruined Douglas, at least any hope they ever had of staying a somewhat rural community.
By chuck
April 21, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this
For Jack and Chilao
Two elderly couples were enjoying friendly conversation when one of the men asked the other, “Fred, how was the memory clinic you went to last month?”
“Outstanding,” Fred replied. “They taught us all the latest psychological techniques: visualization, association. It was great.”
“Wow! What was the name of the clinic?”
Fred went blank. He thought and thought, but couldn’t remember. Then a smile broke across his face and he asked, “What do you call that flower with the long stem and thorns?”
“You mean a rose?”
“Yes, that’s it!” He turned to his wife, “Rose, what was the name of that memory clinic?”
By lozen
April 21, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this
Ah, RF and Jack… day and night are not held together with a hinge. They’re held together with a joint.
By chuck
April 21, 2006 02:30 PM | Link to this
For Lozen
A man hated his wife’s cat and he decided to get rid of it. He drove 20 blocks away from home and dropped the cat there. The cat was already walking up the driveway when he approached his home.
The next day, he decided to drop the cat 40 blocks away but the same thing happened.
He kept on increasing the number of blocks but the cat kept on coming home before him. At last he decided to drive a few miles away, turn right, then left, past the bridge, then right again and another right and so on until he reached what he thought was a perfect spot and dropped the cat there.
Hours later, the man calls his wife at home and asked her, “Jen is the cat there?” “Yes, why do you ask?” answered the wife. Frustrated the man said, “Put that cat on the phone, I am lost and I need directions.”
By Julia
April 21, 2006 02:31 PM | Link to this
RF-WOW, you sound like me…diggin’ in the dirt. I can’t wait to get out the gloves and start adding more to my yard. I love going to Pikes and Home Depot. I’ve forgotten which things I planted last year that year perrenials so it’s a surprise to see what’s growing again this season.
Net-thanks for your advice!LOL Actually, it was a former co-worker and a co-worker’s baby that passed away. Hopefully it’s NOT job related. (But I’m still trying to win the lottery!!!)
By chuck
April 21, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this
For 72john
“If I sold my house and my car, had a big garage sale and gave all my money to the church, would that get me into Heaven?” I asked the children in my Sunday School class.
“NO!” the children all answered.
“If I cleaned the church every day, mowed the yard, and kept everything neat and tidy, would that get me into Heaven?”
Again, the answer was, “NO!
“Well, then, if I was kind to animals and gave candy to all the children, and loved my wife, would that get me into Heaven?” I asked them again.
Again, they all answered, “NO!”
“Well,” I continued, “then how can I get into Heaven?”
A five-year-old boy shouted out, “YOU GOTTA BE DEAD!”
By chuck
April 21, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this
For NetB
A man was walking in the mountains just enjoying the scenery when he stepped too close to the edge of the mountain and started to fall.
In desperation he reached out and grabbed a limb of a gnarly old tree hanging onto the side of the cliff.
Full of fear he assessed his situation. He was about 100 feet down a shear cliff and about 900 feet from the floor of the canyon below. If he should slip again he’d plummet to his death.
Full of fear, he cries out, “Help me!” But there was no answer.
Again and again he cried out but to no avail. Finally he yelled, “Is anybody up there? ”
A deep voice replied, “Yes, I’m up here.”
“Who said that?”
“It’s the Lord.”
“Can you help me?”
“Yes, I can help. Have faith in me.”
“Help me!”
“Just let go.”
Looking around the man became full of panic. “What?!?!”
“Have faith in me. Let go. I will catch you.”
“Uh… Is there anybody else up there?”
By chuck
April 21, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this
For JaP
A handyman was working for a temple in Allentown, PA, had asked for a raise and was turned down. He decided to quit and went out to look for work.
First he went to a Catholic church and was told that in order to work there he would have to answer one question. The priest asked, “Where was Jesus born”? The man answered, “Pittsburgh,” and was thrown out.
He then went to a Baptist church. The minister told him that in order to get a job there he would have to answer a question. He was asked, “Where was Jesus born”? The man answered, “Philadelphia.” He was tossed out.
Walking away he met the rabbi who was looking for him. The rabbi exclaimed, “The board approved your raise. Please come back immediately.”
The man said to the rabbi, “I will come back only if you answer a question. “Where was Jesus born?”
The rabbi says, “Bethlehem.”
“HA!,” cries the man. “I knew it was somewhere in Pennsylvania.”
By lozen
April 21, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this
Pope John Paul II gets to heaven. St. Peter says, “Frankly, you’re lucky to be here.” Pope says, “Why? What did I do wrong on earth?” St. Peter says, “God was very angry with your stance on women becoming priests.” Pope says, “He’s mad about THAT?” St. Peter says, “She’s furious.”
By RF
April 21, 2006 02:39 PM | Link to this
Monica- yep, the mall definitely changed the landscape didn’t it? You can’t get anywhere out there in a hurry. Arbor Station is just surrounded nowadays! I can remember when hwy.5 was two lanes and Arbor Station was about all there was!! (aging myself there) I’m waiting another year to decide if we might head back out that way. I’m not thrilled with middle school down here, so I’m keeping my ears open to see what’s around.
By RF
April 21, 2006 02:39 PM | Link to this
Monica- yep, the mall definitely changed the landscape didn’t it? You can’t get anywhere out there in a hurry. Arbor Station is just surrounded nowadays! I can remember when hwy.5 was two lanes and Arbor Station was about all there was!! (aging myself there) I’m waiting another year to decide if we might head back out that way. I’m not thrilled with middle school down here, so I’m keeping my ears open to find out what’s going on elsewhere.
By chuck
April 21, 2006 02:41 PM | Link to this
For RF
Two young engineers applied for a single position at a com- puter company. They both had the same qualifications. In order to determine which individual to hire, the applicants were asked to take a test by the Department manager.
Upon completion of the test, both men missed only one of the questions. The manager went to the first applicant and said, “Thank you for your interest, but we’ve decided to give the job to the other applicant.”
“But why? We both got 9 questions correct,” asked the re- jected applicant.
“We have based our decision not on the correct answers, but on the question you missed,” said the manager. “Your fellow applicant put down for question #5, ‘I don’t know the answer.’ And you put down, ‘Neither do I.’”
By Julia
April 21, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this
Chuck-great jokes! I really like the one about the boy and the baseball (since my son is playing t-ball now).
Maybe I’ll find a few jokes to add to the mix. My funny bone is feeling a little better now.;)
By lozen
April 21, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this
A priest & a rabbi operated a church and a synagogue across the street from each other. Since their schedules intertwined, they decided to go in together to buy a car. After the purchase, they drove it home and parked it on the street between them. A few minutes later, the rabbi looked out and saw the priest sprinkling water on their new car. It didn’t need a wash, so he hurried out and asked the priest what he was doing. “I’m blessing it,” the priest replied. The rabbi considered this a moment, then went back inside the synagogue. He reappeared a moment later with a hacksaw, walked over to the back of the car and cut off two inches of the tailpipe.
By RF
April 21, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this
Julia- I love to watch my dianthus bed come back and bloom every year. I actually had a few begonias that came back- I had the bed pretty well insulated for winter. I want to get out some irises. My mom has gobs of them and they’re so pretty. Digging in the dirt is my therapy some weeks.
By Jack
April 21, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this
Trivia. Who gave their seat to Richie Vallens on the plane that crashed killing Buddy Holly and all on board?
By lozen
April 21, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this
Upon the return of his daughter after five years with no contact, her Irish father cursed her; “Where have you been all this time, you ingrate! Why didn’t you write us; not even a line to let us know how you were doing? Why didn’t you call? Don’t you know what you put your Mum through??!!” The girl, crying, replied, “Sniff, sniff… Dad… I became a prostitute…” “WHAT!!? Out of here, you shameless harlot! Sinner! You’re a disgrace to this family - I don’t ever want to see you again!” “OK, Dad - as you wish. I just came back to give Mom this luxury fur coat, title deeds to a ten bed-roomed mansion, plus a savings account certificate for £5 million. For my little brother, this gold Rolex, and for you, Daddy, the spanking new Mercedes limited edition convertible parked outside, plus a lifetime membership to the Country Club…(takes a breath)…an invitation for you all to spend New Year’s Eve on board my new yacht in the Riviera, and….” “Now, what was it you said you had become?” Girl, crying again, “Sniff, sniff… A prostitute, Dad… Sniff, sniff.” “Oh! Be Jesus! - you scared me half to death, girl! I thought you said “a Protestant”. Come here and give your old man a hug!”
By chuck
April 21, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this
Thanks Julia…here’s one especially for YOU!!!
There’s a man trying to cross the street. As he steps off the curb a car comes screaming around the corner and heads straight for him. The man walks faster, trying to hurry across the street, but the car changes lanes and is still coming at him.
So the guy turns around to go back, but the car changes lanes again and is still coming at him.
By now, the car is so close and the man so scared that he just freezes and stops in the middle of the road.
The car gets real close, then swerves at the last possible moment and screeches to a halt right next him.
The driver rolls down the window.
The driver is a squirrel.
The squirrel says to the man says, “See, it’s not as easy as it looks, is it?”
By RF
April 21, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this
chuck- LOL! Have you noticed how stupidly children cheat now? I catch them every time. They copy somebody’s work word for word and don’t even correct the grammar or spelling.
By lozen
April 21, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this
A missionary visited a small village in a remote jungle and began preaching the gospel. “Jesus saves!” exclaimed the missionary. “Bawana!” shouted the natives. “Ye must be baptized!” exclaimed the missionary. “Bawana!” shouted the natives “Donate tithes and offerings!” exclaimed the missionary. “Bawana!” shouted the natives. Having had such a successful time, the missionalry inquired of the chief as to how he could go to the next village, to share the gospel with them too. The chief replied, “You go down road one thousand paces, you turn right, climb over wall made of rocks, run across field. Many bulls in field, you run fast, be careful not step in bawana.”
By kimberly
April 21, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
It was Waylon Jennings, Hon. His boy Shooter, has a new album out.
By RF
April 21, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
lozen— Bawana! LOLOL I’ll have to use that for my “safe word” in front of my boys. Can’t curse- they hear it every time!!
By chuck
April 21, 2006 03:02 PM | Link to this
Hey RF, I had a kid who was doing a Black History portfolio. The had to choose people from different fields and do biographical sketches on each. One of our little darlin’s took another kids portfolio and copied it on a copy machine and turned it in…including the original kid’s title page which had his NAME ON IT!!!
Had another one who just stole another kid’s portfolio and erased the name and put his name on it. You could still read the original name where he had erased it. Hilarious.
Here is one that I thought was especially apprpriate FOR ALL OF US!
A fly was buzzing along one morning when he saw a lawn mower someone had left out in their front yard. He flew over and sat on the handle, watching the children going down the sidewalk on their way to school.
One little boy tripped on a crack and fell, spilling his lunch on the sidewalk. He picked himself up, put his lunch back in the bag and went on. But he missed a piece of bologna. The fly had not eaten that morning and he sure was hungry. So he flew down and started eating the bologna. In fact he ate so much that he could not fly, so he waddled across the sidewalk, across the lawn, up the wheel of the lawn mower, up the handle, and sat there resting and watching the children.
There was still some bologna laying there on the sidewalk. He was really stuffed, but that baloney sure did look good.
Finally temptation got the best of him and he jumped off the handle of the lawn mower to fly over to the baloney. But alas he was too full to fly and he went splat!!, killing him instantly.
The moral of the story: Don’t fly off the handle when you are full of baloney.
By chuck
April 21, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this
One last joke for the road.
A married couple went to he hospital to have their baby delivered. Upon their arrival, the doctor said he had invented a new machine that would transfer a portion of the mother’s labor pain to the father.
He asked if they were willing to try it out. They were both very much in favor of it. The doctor set the pain transfer dial to 10% for starters, explaining that even 10% was probably more pain than the father had ever experienced before.
But as the labor progressed, the husband felt fine and asked the doctor to go ahead and bump it up a notch. The doctor then adjusted the machine to 20% pain transfer. The husband was still feeling fine. The doctor checked the husband’s blood pressure and was amazed at how well he was doing.
At this point they decided to try for 50%.
The husband continued to feel quite well. Since it was obviously helping out his wife considerably, the husband encouraged the doctor to transfer ALL the pain to him. The wife delivered a healthy baby with virtually no pain.
She and her husband were ecstatic. When they got home, the mailman was dead on their porch.
By Netbanker
April 21, 2006 03:11 PM | Link to this
JAP…Easter was quiet, but Passover was filled with merriment…or at least LOTS of wine that added plenty of giggles and a carefree attitude around the table. I actually like Gefilte fish, but only if it’s fresh. That stuff from a jar is just plain ol’ nasty. In any event the smells of good cooking and mahtzo ball soup were ALL over our building in Florida. I really enjoy the Seder over all the other holidays. My church used to celebrate the seder when I was young as a reminder of our christian roots. The experience must have had some effect on me because later in life I lived in a predominatly jewish area of Baltimore and am now ‘married’ to a NYC Jew. LOL Sometimes I swear I know more about his religion than he does.
Julia…oh how awful for your co-worker to lose a baby. Even when the child is very ill and death brings peace to replace a short life filled with much suffering it somehow seems more tragic than the death of an adult.
Jack…my seeds are started . Now we wait to see which are male and which are female.
RF…I don’t care how well it’s blended in…if you’ve got a good crop then you can SMELL it from a distance. Sadly it doesn’t sound like a good weekend weather wise for the gardeners. I really need to spray the roses, put some annuals out back, and separate the glads and some day lillies.
We should arrange a plant swap. I just can’t throw out plants that I’ve thinned out because they’re getting over grown. I’ve even stuck some out by the signs at the Jr. High where I walk with Abby.
By Julia
April 21, 2006 03:13 PM | Link to this
A great fruit cake recipe
You’ll need the following: a cup of water, a cup of sugar, four large eggs, two cups of dried fruit, a teaspoon of baking soda, a teaspoon of salt, a cup of brown sugar, lemon juice, nuts, and a bottle of whisky.
Sample the whisky to check for quality.
Take a large bowl. Check the whisky again. To be sure it is the highest quality, pour one level cup and drink. Repeat. Turn on the electric mixer, beat one cup of butter in a large fluffy bowl. Add one teaspoon of sugar and beat again.
Make sure the whisky is still okay. Cry another tup. Turn off the mixer. Break two leggs and add to the bowl and chuck in the cup of dried fruit. Mix on the turner. If the fried druit gets stuck in the beaterers pry it loose with a drewscriver.
Sample the whisky to check for tonsisticity. Next, sift two cups of salt. Or something. Who cares? Check the whisky. Now sift the lemon juice and strain your nuts. Add one table. Spoon. Of sugar or something. Whatever you can find.
Grease the oven. Turn the cake tin to 350 degrees. Don’t forget to beat off the turner. Throw the bowl out of the window, check the whisky again and go to bed.
By Jack
April 21, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this
Come on. Someone knows the answer.
Good jokes Chuck.
By RF
April 21, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this
chuck- who on here is full of baloney?? LOL (rhetorical question)
What I love is when the boys in high school get the girls to do their homework. The boys write their name in typical illegible boy-scrawl. A whole essay in pretty, neat handwriting and this chicken scratch at the top. Like somehow I’m not going to notice that…
By kimberly
April 21, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this
By kimberly
April 21, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this
It was Waylon Jennings, Hon. His boy Shooter, has a new album out.
By chuck
April 21, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this
Kimmie answered Waylon Jennings, Jack.
By lozen
April 21, 2006 03:22 PM | Link to this
An anthropologist was studying the Hopi people on the reservation. One day he met an old man, Mr. Begay, sitting on the porch of his hogan. Mr. Begay was singing. The anthropologist asked, “Mr. Begay, what are you singing about?” Mr. Begay said, “I sing about da water.” The next week the anthropologist returned and again Mr. Begay was singing. “What are you singing about this week,” the anthropologist asked. “I am singing about water.” The next week the anthropologist asks what Mr. Begay’s singing about. The old man replied, “I sing always about da water.” The anthropologist said, “I don’t understand; why do you sing about nothing but water?” “We don’t have much water here so we are always thinking about water and singing about water.” Then Mr. Begay said, “My grandson was here da other night and we were listening to one of your radio stations. Seems to me all you white people sing about is love.”
By RF
April 21, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this
Guy named Allsup or something like that flipped a coin with Valens, didn’t he. He had a place called Heads Up Saloon in honor of it.
By RF
April 21, 2006 03:28 PM | Link to this
Julia- I’ll have to try that recipe soon. I would tonight, but we have a birthday party to go to on the other side of town at 10 tomorrow morning!! Nothing worse than hanging out with a yard full of kids with a hangover-YOUCH!!
Net- we really should do the flower swap. I love to get flowers from people. Helps to remember them. I have an aunt who’s getting on in years who always gives us impatiens she’s thinning out every year. I always try to get a few so I’ll have something of hers.
By RF
April 21, 2006 03:30 PM | Link to this
I thought Waylon traded seats with the other one besides Holly- don’t remember his name. They were joking and Waylon said “I hope your plane crashes” jokingly. Supposed to have bothered him for the rest of his life.
By Julia
April 21, 2006 03:39 PM | Link to this
A customer was bothering the waiter in a restaurant. First, he asked that the air conditioning be turned up because he was too hot, then he asked it be turned down cause he was too cold, and so on for about half an hour.
Surprisingly, the waiter was very patient, he walked back and forth and never once got angry. So finally, a second customer asked him why he didn’t throw out the pest.
“Oh, I really don’t care or mind,” said the waiter with a smile. “We don’t even have an air conditioner.”
By Jack
April 21, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this
Hi Sweet Thing. :)
By RF
April 21, 2006 03:50 PM | Link to this
Well kiddies, it’s been fun, and now I must fly— up, up, and awaaaaay, in my beautiful, my beautiful balooooon!
Don’t know why that one hit me- must be flashing back to the 70’s or something- that or the cafeteria ladies spiked the lasagna (canabis, oregano- who cares?) hehehe!! Have a good one all!!
By kimberly
April 21, 2006 04:03 PM | Link to this
Hi. Super slammed today, hence not fighting evil and ignorance as usual. The day the music died was a sad one indeed. Um… I am of course, NOT old enough to remember it, but the song and the movie both made me sad. Lalalalala BAMBA, lalalalalala!
By Chilao
April 21, 2006 04:12 PM | Link to this
Waylon? I thought it was WillieNelson? Funny they don’t really mention that crash(Do they?) in the recent Walk the Line movie, Cash roomed with Waylon, and Waylon’s son played Waylon.(Sr)
funny, funnies, ahhh, ahhh, Rose? Oh, wait, Chuck. LOL funnies funnies Lozen and Julia as well.
NetB - I don’t think hasish tea behaves the same as smoked hash, not that I know anything about anything like that, but knew an oil importer once.in 5 gallon buckets.LOL(he did time in a Turkish prison). and it not even like the tea is supposed to be like, not that I know anything about anything like that. But yeah, I’d buy that LSD/Revelations argument, but like I said, not that I would know anything about even that. LMAO the tea supposed to be alot nastier.
have a good weekend all, long work lunch here, and jamming with work to boot. and hope ajc gets this slug load fixed soon, long pages never USED to be a problem here. even their shorter blogs loading real lousy.
By Jack
April 21, 2006 04:13 PM | Link to this
Have a good weekend all!
By Julia
April 21, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this
RF-I have some of those coming up in my yard too. I also have hostas, daisies, hydrangea, echinacea, phlox, (and a few I can’t remember the name of right now).
Can you tell me the best mulch to use that will deter ants? I used hardwood last year and the ants LOVED it!
By Julia
April 21, 2006 04:28 PM | Link to this
HOW TO MAINTAIN A HEALTHY LEVEL OF INSANITY IN THE WORKPLACE
Page yourself over the intercom. Don’t disguise your voice.
Find out where your boss shops and buy exactly the same outfits. Wear them one day after your boss does. This is especially effective if your boss is of a different gender than you.
Make up nicknames for all your coworkers and refer to them only by these names. “That’s a good point, Sparky.” “No, I’m sorry, but I’m going to have to disagree with you there, Cha-cha.”
Send e-mail to the rest of the company telling them exactly what you’re doing. For example: “If anyone needs me, I’ll be in the bathroom.”
Hi-Lite your shoes. Tell people you haven’t lost them as much since you did this.
While sitting at your desk, soak your fingers in Palmolive liquid. Call everyone Madge.
Hang mosquito netting around your cubicle. When you emerge to get coffee or a printout or whatever, slap yourself randomly the whole way.
Put a chair facing a printer. Sit there all day and tell people you’re waiting for your document.
Every time someone asks you to do something, anything, ask him or her if they want fries with that.
Send e-mail back and forth to yourself engaging yourself in an intellectual debate. Forward the mail to a co-worker and ask her to settle the disagreement.
Encourage your colleagues to join you in a little synchronized chair-dancing.
Put your trash can on your desk. Label it “IN.”
Feign an unnatural and hysterical fear of staplers.
Send e-mail messages saying there’s free pizza or donuts or cake in the lunchroom. When people drift back to work complaining that they found none, lean back, pat your stomach and say, “Oh you’ve got to be faster than that.”
Put decaf in the coffee maker for three weeks. Once everyone has withdrawn from caffeine addiction, switch to espresso.
By Julia
April 21, 2006 04:35 PM | Link to this
Am I the only one having problems with this site today?
Play the Office Game
Here’s a way to spice up your office. Pick two or three colleagues and agree to play the Office Game which awards points as follows:
ONE POINT
Run one lap around the office at top speed. Walk sideways to the photocopier.
Find the vacuum and start vacuuming around your desk.
When they’re not looking, pour most of someone’s fresh cup of coffee into your mug leaving them with an inch of brew.
Ignore the first five people who say ‘good morning’ to you.
Phone someone in the office you barely know, leave your name and say “Just called to say I can’t talk right now. Bye.”
To signal the end of a conversation, clamp your hands over your ears and grimace.
While riding an elevator, gasp dramatically every time the doors open.
THREE-POINTS
Babble incoherently at a fellow employee then ask “Did you get all that, I don’t want to have to repeat it.” - Double points if you do this to a manager.
Kneel in front of the water cooler and drink directly from the nozzle.
Shout random numbers while someone is counting.
FIVE POINTS
At the end of a meeting, suggest that, for once, it would be nice to conclude with the singing of the national anthem (extra points if you actually launch into it yourself).
Walk into a very busy person’s office and while they watch you with growing irritation, turn the light switch on/off 10 times.
For an hour, refer to everyone you speak to as ‘Bob’.
Announce to everyone in a meeting that you “really have to go do number two”.
After every sentence, say ‘mon’ in a really bad Jamaican accent. As in, “the report’s on your desk, mon”. Keep this up for one hour.
While an office mate is out, move their chair into the elevator.
In a meeting or crowded situation, slap your forehead repeatedly and mutter, “Shut up, all of you just shut up!”
In a colleague’s diary, write in 10 am: “See how I look in tights”.
Carry your laptop over to your colleague and ask “You wanna trade?”
Repeat the following conversation 10 times to the same person: “Do you hear that?” “What?” “Never mind, it’s gone now”
Come to work in army fatigues and when asked why, say, “I can’t talk about it”
Speak with an accent (French, German, Porky Pig, etc.) during a very important conference call.
Tuck one pant leg into your sock and when queried, answer, “not now” and walk away.