Commander PK Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 2 minutes ago, Die Hard said: He doesn’t think/speak for himself. He’s not voting his conscience at all. I’m still waiting for an answer on what “women’s rights” are. In fact, what is a “woman” exactly? and if I’m not speaking for myself, who am I speaking for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabbyrwock Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 Just now, Commander PK said: I’m still waiting for an answer on what “women’s rights” are. They're on the other side from the women's lefts. Duh. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 10 minutes ago, Commander PK said: "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 Trump checks a lot of those boxes. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 Just fyi We have an unofficial policy here, Commander, to avoid using passages from religious texts to argue topical positions. Hopefully it will be obvious as to the dead end or topic-derailing exchanges that can occur when doing that in these kind of conversations with a diverse group of people. We do have a lot of Christians here, and some Muslims and agnostics/atheists etc etc and it's not about "censoring" religion or religious people at all. It's just pragmatic. We do have an actual bible verse thread, btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brandymac27 Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 (edited) I'm with @Hersh on this 100%. It's everyone's prerogative to believe whatever they want and live the life they choose to live, and nobody has the right to take anyone's basic human rights away from them (despite your personal beliefs/moral code). If someone is happy, let them live. They aren't hurting anyone. And not that I'm a Bible thumper, but for those that bring Christianity into the discussion on why, for example, homosexuality is against their "moral code", doesn't the Bible say "edited out after reading Jumbo, but basically "don't judge others yada, yada, yada"? Don't get me started on a jackass Gov candidate in my own sate, who's preaching in a church, to literally kill people. Or the conservatives who are vehemently against Roe v Wade, yet don't want to do a damn thing to help those babies survive AFTER birth via proper nutrition and medical care. The list goes on, and so does the hypocrisy. Edited July 15 by brandymac27 1 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 @Jumbo ok, no problem 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Commander PK said: That is why I said it is the law of the land and it is what it is, (render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s) but I don’t have to like or support it and I will never stop doing my part at the ballot box to defeat or overturn it. I also realize that will never happen, because of the sinful nature of man. I can live with things I don’t like, because I know my heart and where I stand. But you missed the point. The whole concept of marriage today in that nature is tied to the state/Caesar. The word marriage as we use it today actually predates Christianity and was derived from Latin and so was in fact a pagan word. When Jesus spoke of "marriage", he didn't actually mean marriage as we understand it or was understood by the pagans that we've adopted the word for. Jesus would have used a different word that would have meant something different to the Jews than the pagan living at the same time. The marriage license (and the process of getting one) is based on state based policies, signed by somebody approved by the state, for the purpose of the state. It is of Caesar and for Caesar. Edited July 15 by PeterMP 2 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 2 minutes ago, brandymac27 said: I'm with @Hersh on this 100%. It's everyone's prerogative to believe whatever they want and live the life they choose to live, and nobody has the right to take anyone's basic human rights away from them (despite your personal beliefs/moral code). If someone is happy, let them live. They aren't hurting anyone. And not that I'm a Bible thumper, but for those that bring Christianity into the discussion on why, for example, homosexuality is against their "moral code", doesn't the Bible say "Judge not, that you be not judged"? Don't get me started on a jackass Gov candidate in my own sate, who's preaching in a church, to literally kill people. Or the conservatives who are vehemently against Roe v Wade, yet don't want to do a damn thing to help those babies survive AFTER birth via proper nutrition and medical care. The list goes on, and so does the hypocrisy. Or do nothing to support the post-natal moms with reasonable paid pregnancy leaves. 3 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 Here is a novel thought. How about… “don’t have a baby…if you can’t feed your baby, and don’t say maybe…if you can’t feed your baby” Michael Jackson -1983 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CousinsCowgirl84 Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 2 minutes ago, Commander PK said: Here is a novel thought. How about… “don’t have a baby…if you can’t feed your baby, and don’t say maybe…if you can’t feed your baby” Michael Jackson -1983 Useless naive advice. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 @PeterMP I’m not a theologian or a preacher, but the Bible in multiple places makes it clear homosexuality is a sin. Therefore a union between two homosexuals is also a sin. For me, it’s that simple. I don’t like it, but it is the law of the land at this time. Probably will be until the end times. Doesn’t make it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 12th Commandment Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 14 minutes ago, Commander PK said: I’m still waiting for an answer on what “women’s rights” are. In fact, what is a “woman” exactly? and if I’m not speaking for myself, who am I speaking for? A woman's right to do whatever she wants whether you like it or not. Just now, Commander PK said: @PeterMP I’m not a theologian or a preacher, but the Bible in multiple places makes it clear homosexuality is a sin. Therefore a union between two homosexuals is also a sin. For me, it’s that simple. I don’t like it, but it is the law of the land at this time. Probably will be until the end times. Doesn’t make it right. But why should people that don't believe as you do be subjected to your idea of what's right. You continue to refuse to answer. What's your rationalization for thinking you should be able to impose your will on others? I'm seriously curious. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purbeast Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 Yea you know why the bible says homosexuality is a sin? Because the whole idea behind the religion is to spread it to as many people as possible, and same sex couples can't reproduce and "spread the word" to their kids, to repeat the cycle. I mean it's the same reason that sex before marriage, or contraceptive, is looked down upon because it stops the word from being spread. It's all about getting more people into the religion because that means more money and more control. It's a really basic concept and that is now why the same churches are starting to be open to the LGBTQ+ community because they are not getting the new members like they used to and need to have a larger possible pool of people to draw from. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berggy9598 Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 1 minute ago, Commander PK said: @PeterMP I’m not a theologian or a preacher, but the Bible in multiple places makes it clear homosexuality is a sin. Therefore a union between two homosexuals is also a sin. For me, it’s that simple. I don’t like it, but it is the law of the land at this time. Probably will be until the end times. Doesn’t make it right. I mean if we’re deeming something right or wrong based on some nobody’s personal belief system that nobody else is obligated to follow, I say it’s right. Problem solved. What’s the difference between me proclaiming it’s right and you proclaiming it’s wrong? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purbeast Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 (edited) 2 minutes ago, The 12th Commandment said: But why should people that don't believe as you do be subjected to your idea of what's right. You continue to refuse to answer. What's your rationalization for thinking you should be able to impose your will on others? I'm seriously curious. He won't be able to answer that question because he doesn't have an answer that makes any logical sense or has any actual reasoning. It will just be "but muh religions!" He doesn't even know why he is just blindly following a 2000 year old book. Edited July 15 by purbeast 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 Just now, CousinsCowgirl84 said: Useless naive advice. What is naive about it? To expect people to not bring another life into this world if they are not financially prepared to take care of such life? Your irresponsible choice to make a baby when you were not prepared should not involve my pocket. Have some self-control. I realize things happen and people should always get a hand up when needed…but not an endless supply of handouts, or a system that consistently subsidizes their irresponsible behavior. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brandymac27 Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 1 minute ago, Commander PK said: Here is a novel thought. How about… “don’t have a baby…if you can’t feed your baby, and don’t say maybe…if you can’t feed your baby” Michael Jackson -1983 OK, so you're perfect and never made a bad decision or mistake in your life. Got it. Meanwhile, by your logic, we'll just let them all die anyway because the extra $30 a month you pay to feed those babies and give them proper medical care is ridiculous. After all, it's the principle. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 Just now, Cooked Crack said: Literally the first words out of his mouth during that fist pumping moment was “Fight” 3 times. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 2 minutes ago, Berggy9598 said: I mean if we’re deeming something right or wrong based on some nobody’s personal belief system that nobody else is obligated to follow, I say it’s right. Problem solved. What’s the difference between me proclaiming it’s right and you proclaiming it’s wrong? The difference is who wins at the ballot box. I can live with not being in the majority. Could you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 2 minutes ago, purbeast said: Yea you know why the bible says homosexuality is a sin? Because the whole idea behind the religion is to spread it to as many people as possible, and same sex couples can't reproduce and "spread the word" to their kids, to repeat the cycle. I mean it's the same reason that sex before marriage, or contraceptive, is looked down upon because it stops the word from being spread. It's all about getting more people into the religion because that means more money and more control. It's a really basic concept and that is now why the same churches are starting to be open to the LGBTQ+ community because they are not getting the new members like they used to and need to have a larger possible pool of people to draw from. This doesn't seem to be logical. If it is about having kids, then having sex before marriage would be okay and non-monogamous relationships would be okay too. If what is important is having kids as much sex as possible with as many people as possible would be most beneficial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purbeast Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 (edited) 2 minutes ago, PeterMP said: This doesn't seem to be logical. If it is about having kids, then having sex before marriage would be okay and non-monogamous relationships would be okay too. If what is important is having kids as much sex as possible with as many people as possible would be most beneficial. Yah but having sex outside of wedlock is "bad" because you don't have the family values of a marriage christian family. Those kids wont' be able to be taught the family christian values if they are born without a married mommy and daddy. So yah, not quite the same as the other stuff I guess. Edited July 15 by purbeast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RansomthePasserby Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 (edited) 3 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said: Such a brave guy, not taking care of business when it could have avoided two deaths and the GOP candidate wounded. (sarcasm) To be fair to the officer, if he was not in a position to immediately take out the shooter (like in the act of climbing a ladder) retreating to cover, then communicating the shooter’s location to the rest of the security team was the correct move. If he got into a gunfight with the shooter and loses the fight without communicating what happened to the rest of the team, then the shooter would still be able to surprise the Secret Service and possibly get away. The officer spotting the shooter first might be the only reason the Secret Service snipers were able to return fire at the shooter so quickly. Edited July 15 by RansomthePasserby Clarity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CousinsCowgirl84 Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 1 minute ago, Commander PK said: What is naive about it? To expect people to not bring another life into this world if they are not financially prepared to take care of such life? Your irresponsible choice to make a baby when you were not prepared should not involve my pocket. Have some self-control. I realize things happen and people should always get a hand up when needed…but not an endless supply of handouts, or a system that consistently subsidizes their irresponsible behavior. 1) it’s not always choice to become pregnant. 2) it’s not always a choice to have an abortion. 3) having a baby is carries huge risks for women, but men don’t have to worry at all about those consequences. 4) circumstances change. Your naive stance that woman are out there having wild sex and then using abortion as birth control is ignorant as ****. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brandymac27 Posted July 15 Share Posted July 15 3 minutes ago, Commander PK said: What is naive about it? To expect people to not bring another life into this world if they are not financially prepared to take care of such life? Your irresponsible choice to make a baby when you were not prepared should not involve my pocket. Have some self-control. I realize things happen and people should always get a hand up when needed…but not an endless supply of handouts, or a system that consistently subsidizes their irresponsible behavior. Expecting the religious right to not be hypocrites is crazy too, but here we are. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now