O/T: The Decision is in

Page 2 of 3  
evodawg wrote:

Because rabid leftist think that their position is "middle of the road" they are so disconnected from Western History and tradition.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I recall reading that Southern Baptists had the highest homocide rate of any demographic group in the USA. That might have been a particular subset, or is that subsect?
--
FF

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Somebody wrote:

The operative word being "Normal" which unfortunately is seldom the case.
The "Hell Fire and Brimstone" bunch don't appear to be able to get over the lions yet.
Lew
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Lew Hodgett wrote:

So it sounds as if it is from this that you have derived your visceral hatred of anything Christian. The sad thing is that based upon the actions of your exposure to extremists of a denomination, you have jeopardized your eternal soul. This is where I will partially agree with you in that by attempting to legislate certain morality with the objective of making a society more "Christian", one of two things happen a) people think that they are right with God based upon their following those codes (secular righteousness) and thus don't need anything else to be saved, or b) people are repulsed by this approach and reject the earnest attempts to reach them with the gospel message because all they see Christianity as is a bunch of rules and laws that restrict their fun. Neither of which is really what Christianity is about. Christianity is about the fact that after one dies, the only answer that a righteous God asking why he should let you into His heaven is that one knows that although a sinner, Christ paid for his sins and it is by that sacrifice that one can expect salvation.
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Can you think of any other reason why that might be a bad idea?
--
FF


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
WOODWORKING!!!!!!!!!!!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Fred the Red Shirt wrote:

The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer.
    Albert Einstein
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Pretty much sums it up for me, and the foundation of my faith is exactly that.
But I can't reconcile Christ's teachings and the behaviour of the thugs in the White House. Allowing the slaughter of civilians in Gaza alone is just plain wrong. And many other examples.
But you, Mark, are so dug in, that any further discussions on these issues feels futile.
It took 19 terrorists to pull off 911. They came from 'over there'. How many Muslims on this planet, Mark? Take that number and divide the number 19 into that. You'd have to eliminate 50 million+ to reduce that number from 19 to 18. You have, by some estimates, 5 million in your country..so that would make a nice start? Kill them all so 911 can't happen again? Is that the logic? Ooops, we have to kill those who could spawn the likes of Timothy McVeigh too.
Listen, I know my argument is ridiculous and there are times when rising up to defeat an enemy is warranted, but it should never be a decision made by the money lenders.
These are all the words I am going to spend on this in this thread.
r
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

My 84 yr old aunt does on politics (Democrat) but nobody could accuse her of normal.

Nope ....West coast here..... Although we do attend a large(5000-10,000) Baptist church here but the pastor strongly preaches the bible and I'm yet to see much on baptist doctrine. I do have 3 brother-inlaws as preachers and one as a hospital chaplin (former minister) and a now passed away father-inlaw with a 60 yr career as a minister(always small churches and if he had one winter coat he'd find someone to give it to). I have a Grandfather and a Grandmother as well that preached and have never heard any of them or anyone preach hate or intolerance.....I have snoozed a time or two in church but doubt if I missed it. I have no doubt it happens but my experience shows far from the norm.......Rod
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What intolerance? It's the "bible thumpers" who attempt to apply their beliefs to everyone else.

Typically republican claptrap when they disagree with a court decision.
The supreme court found that the law was in contradiction to the constitution. The constitution wins. Purely a matter of law.
I think any real American should rejoice in the decision. The state is refraining from involvment in the affairs of the people, shouldn't that be the way it is? If you don't like gay marriage, don't marry a gay. But don't take your biblical fundamentalism and personal beliefs and attempt to apply them to the rest of the populace.
scott
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
:> :>Having a state Supreme court act as King without regard to both the CA :>legislature and the CA 2000 public initiative should give anyone pause.
: Typically republican claptrap when they disagree with a court decision.
: The supreme court found that the law was in contradiction to the : constitution. The constitution wins. Purely a matter of law.
: I think any real American should rejoice in the decision. The state : is refraining from involvment in the affairs of the people, shouldn't : that be the way it is? If you don't like gay marriage, don't marry a : gay. But don't take your biblical fundamentalism and personal beliefs : and attempt to apply them to the rest of the populace.
Very well said. The Founders would approve.
    -- Andy Barss
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote

That depends .... or you old, or young, and do you want a city of "Laws", or a city of the "Republic"?
Re-read your Plato, dude! ;)
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/08
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Swingman wrote:

I know what I don't want: Someone deciding that their moral code is so right, they get to jam it down my throat...
P.S. I am neither old nor young.
P.P.S. Plato had his betters, Locke leaps to mind. Plato is essentially obsolete. He was replaced by Marx for people on the political left and by guys like Hagee for people on the right.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote in message

"Laws", or

Tsk, tsk ... "An intelligent man will prize those studies which result in his soul getting soberness, righteousness, and wisdom ..."
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/08
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 15 May 2008 16:03:50 -0500, Tim Daneliuk wrote:

How about that? We agree on something :-).
But how about polygamy, or polyandry, or group marriage, or whatever. Yes they should also be legal. But how do you define child abuse in those groups? If a girl willingly (albeit brainwashed) becomes a wife at an age below that which the state considers informed consent, does the state have the right to step in? I'm still scratching my head on that one.
BTW, I ran across a sentence in a book today that reminded me of the cults, etc.. "The biggest lies are those we tell ourselves."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry Blanchard wrote:

How on earth any man would want more than one woman telling him what to do all the time is beyond me. It's like signing up to go to GTMO I think.

I'm not. We choose an age of majority as a society. It is an average that will be too high or low for some people. But we choose one as a matter of rule of law. People engaged in sexual activity with partners below that age are committing a crime, period. Having said that, I think you have to have a scaled set of responses. How about 10 years in jail for every year the minor was below majority age. Have sex with a 12 year old, go to jail for 60 years. A 17 year old, 10 years. Something like that. Or better still make it geometric:
Age Of Minor Jail Time
17 1 year 16 2 years 15 4 years 14 8 years 13 16 years
Or non linear:
Age Of Minor Jail Time
17 1 year 16 5 years 15 15 years 14 30 years 13 75 years
Something along these lines, with room in the first couple of years for judicial latitude (a boy who just turned 18 who has sexual contact with his girlfriend who won't be 18 until next week shouldn't go to jail or be seen as a felon in any sense).

Naw. You lefties tell the biggest whoppers I ever heard. <Ducks and runs>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 15 May 2008 18:01:59 -0500, Tim Daneliuk wrote:

Well, I don't think anyone supports legal sex with a 10 year old - there's no gray area there. But it hasn't been that long ago that 14 was considered the age of consent in several states, and may still be in some - at 71 I don't keep up with that sort of thing :-).
And what if the male having sex with the 14 year old is himself 14? Surely that's less of an offense than if he was 40. Maybe your list needs to be a table :-).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry Blanchard wrote:

Yeah, but that was when people died at 40 and you needed all the kids you could have to keep the farm alive. One of the great blessings of Capitalism, specialization, and industry is that we can live longer with fewer children, enjoy the children we do have by seeing them well into their middle age before we die, and not have to resort to teenage reproduction. 14 is just plain too young. Then again, there are people I know that I pray *never* have such contact at any age on the off chance they reproduce, thereby polluting the gene pool.

I shudder to contemplate any of the above...
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Tim Daneliuk" wrote

Actually, and inarguably, at whatever age a human is old enough to "reproduce" is decided entirely by nature.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 5/14/08
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Which may be why some states have the age of consent set at thirteen.
Canuckistanis seem to think 14 is fine.
Having a sixteen year old daughter, I believe the age should be 24, as in 24 hours after I'm dead.
Mr. D. needs to not confuse the legal concepts of "age of consent", "age of license", and "age of majority".
Tom Watson tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.