Say it's not so!
Since I've still got a couple minutes until my job interview, I'll refine what I said even more:
I do not know your friend; I don't know what she is like, I don't know anything about her. All I have when it comes to what happened is your word. I'm taking your word for it KFC, but, as my nature dictates...I'm still skeptical. That's just my nature, which I cannot change. Anytime I hear about something having happened, I take it as hearsay and suspicious - even if it is from my dearest friends. *shrugs* Again, it's the way I am.
That being said, as such, I leave it open to the fact that either:
A) She didn't do it, and the man was wrong.
She did do it, and the man was right.
Admittedly, I'm actually leaning more toward A. Oddly enough...
That help?
~Alderic
Alderic Jourdain posts:
The reason comes from God's word to us in Genesis.....the reason is to "be fruitful and multiply" in other words, the reason is to keep the human race going.
AldericJourdain posts:
Ah, no....I'm not here to proselytize or recruit. My interest lies in Catholic apologetics and I do my best to defend the Catholic Church and the true Christian Faith to other Catholics as well as to any one who is ignorant of them or for whatever reason bashes them.
Yes, I know we are a pluralistic society and also that not everyone wants to hear what I may say, but that doesn't change the fact that there is but one truth when it comes to the One God, Christ, religion, faith, the Church. etc.
And besides that, who comes into these discussions without expecting to be engaged? And no matter who we are, who can't learn a thing or two from dialogue providing it's done with respect for the other person? Isn't that what makes dialogue useful?
This makes me giggle, only because it was the same thing my father thought....and now he has anywhere from 13 to 36 children. Anyways, setting aside the personal dealings - I'm not quite sure I get your point, mind clarifying?
First off, my apologies. When I say you, or your (or the like) - it's mean in a very generalized, rhetorical way.
What gets me ticked off, is when there are those who claim to be doing God's work, but only make things worse. Yes, they have their beliefs and the freedom of speech, but those are not the only things in the wordl and their belief is not the only belief in the world. If these people, the ones that are adding to the chaos, were...wise, or aware enough - then that is great, no, fantastic.
Perhaps, I can't say much because I don't believe in there being one truth.
Exactly, respect. That's what I keep trying to hit at. Both sides in this so called "Culture War," fail to respect each other. And that goes for atheists, liberals, secularists, etc as much as it does for their opposites.
Hence, live and let live. The world has enough chaos and disorder and hate and violence - with or without God - why add to the destruction? Why cause more problems?
Really, all I ask/expect in a debate is respect, and an attempt to try to step outside of that box they build for themselves. Take a look at things through other people's eyes, because maybe, just maybe...in it can be found a way to heal the world.
You know?
aldericjourdain posts:
post #90
But who is shoving what things onto others? Why don't you apply your admonition to those shoving the homosexual agenda?
First of all, it goes without saying that I realize, understand and accept that we are a diverse people, so that's not the point.
I'm not judging people who call themselves homosexuals, but rather, I'm judging their sexual behavior which the radicals amongst them flaunt and attempt to force acceptance of.
Besides my religion, on grounds of conscience, common sense, and knowledge of basic biology, I refuse to accept, condone or acknowledge that homosexuality is normal, natural, respectable or good.
Following that, to use your own words......the world doesn't need those people shoving forced acceptance of homosexuality upon society (and me since I am not an island but a part of society) through unconstitional anti-discrimination and marriage laws.
Same can be said of abortion...the world doesn't need those people shoving forced acceptance of the practice of abortion upon society through unelected supreme court justices who have no authority to make constitutional law.
Hmmm....perhaps in your world of moral relativity, you will defend how the practice of homosexuality is good for society. Maybe you could convince the national blood banks to change their policy and take blood from those who openly practice homosexuality and bisexuality.
In response, use your own words:
I agree...there certainly are those persons in the homosexual lifestyle who live very quiet and discreet lives.
Natural?
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=gay-animals-and-evolution
450+ species with documented examples of same-sex sexual relasonships with numerous peer-reviewed scientific papers about them.
And now a way that suggests why it might be a benifit from an evolution point of view. Well, apart from the fact that evolution didn't happen, so god must have made all these different species as they are, in all their homosexual glory.
nope, not buying it. You have nothing to back this up with do you? It's one thing to make a claim........ I can show you again and again your subjectiveness and contrary spirit when it comes to the opposite side. I'm not like that at all. I've gone against people who may be on my side of things if I see error involved. I'm not blind nor do I consider myself very subjective in most cases. I try very hard to be objective and truthful even at the cost of losing friends if I have to. Although I learned a long time ago that it's better to lose an argument than a friend. It doesn't mean tho, that I'm going to automatically take their side to keep their friendship especially if I think they are in error.
Take Lula and I for example. I love Lula yet I'm not willing to give her a pass automatically and anyone who has watched us in action can see that. I am a Christian with very strong religious views but I don't automatically take the religionists' side without thoughtfully examining the issue at stake. I'm probably 50% when it comes to taking their side depending on the variables involved. I'm not going to take someone's side just because they're a Christian. That's not my plumbline.
You, on the other hand, are so subjective on what is dear to your heart...... say the gay issue since that's been discussed quite a bit here. It doesn't matter what the gay side did, you alway jump to their defense. Just like I showed you here. But also when I wrote about Miss Calif getting fired you automatically said she didn't keep her contract. Yet, when I asked you what rules she broke you mealy mouthed your answer admitting you had no knowledge. But that's not going to change your attitude towards her. In your eyes she's still guilty because she's not on the gay side.
You are very subjective and not at all showing me that you can be objective about these matters. So when I write it's very predictable what you are going to say. I don't even have to hear your response. I know pretty much which way you are going to automatically come down in the discussion.
I feel you're trying my patience Lucas and I have to admit, it's not my long suit.
no. I've already talked with a Scientist on this issue. He works with mice 24/7 so I asked him about this when it came up earlier. He says they have to separate the sexes because all the females would end up pregnant. So when all the male mice are together they turn to each other (like they do in prisons) because of sexual tension. But if you put females in there, all that changes. The animals NEVER prefer their own sex over another.
This is true. But God is a God of order. The disorder you see is coming from man's rule.....not God's rule. The only way to get back to order is to go back and re-examine the ways of God. He's just sitting there waiting for us to listen.
Well that's not how it came across with your first response.
Ok, fair enough. I mean 'gods' law does say 'thou shall not lie with a man as you would a woman, unless of course you are randy and there are only men around'.
Does that mean you don't find anything 'against nature' when people in jail bugger each other?
Or the example of male-male pairs hatching and rearing eggs (produced by a third party of course). Nothing like human examples.
etc etc.
First of all we're not animals. We do have self-control. We do have reason and intellect.
See what's happening is you're buying into the whole "we're nothing but brutes therory" which comes right out of the Darwinian Humanistic teaching and helped Hitler do his thing.
So, if that's true, then anything goes. And look around our world....anything is going and bringing us right down the tubes.
The bible is clear. God says he's waiting for the cup of inquity to fill to overflowing before he steps in and judges the nations. We're just wondering how long he's going to let this continue. He says he's a patient God and I think he's proving that for sure.
But if it happens in nature it can not be 'unnatural'.
We are animals. We are all animals. Look it up.
no, we're not. Look it up.
Oh, ok then *backs away slowly while destroying all evidence that all humans are mammals and all mammals animals'.
Do you have a comment about the gay prision thing still being unnatural when it happens in nature, and not just in zoos or the like? (please bear in mind the definations of the words, you know the actual definations)
it is unnatural. It shouldn't take Einstein or an Act of Congress to convince people of this. Just look not only at the human body but at the diff between the sexes emotionally as well as physically. Just because it's done doesn't make it right or natural. Families killing their kids isn't natural either, but it's being done with even more frequency today.
Everything starts with a thought. Right thinking precedes right living.
The mice said that? Hmm.
Talk about blind, willful denial. Sheesh.
God tells us that on the same day He made all animals that walk on the earth (the sixth day), He created man separately in His own image with the intent that man would have dominion over every other living thing on Earth. From this it is clear that there is no animal that is man’s equal, and certainly none his ancestor.
Here's a quote from a Dr. David Pilbeam who is a distinguished Professor of anthropology
"Perhaps generations of students of human evolution, including myself, have been flailing about in the dark; that our data base is too sparse, too slippery, for it to be able to mold our theories. Rather the theories are more statements about us and ideology than about the past. Paleoanthropology reveals more about how humans view themselves than it does about how humans came about. But that is heresy" (American Scientist 1978)
No, we humans are not animals nor were we once created or evolved from them. God created man as a crown of his creation giving man dominion over the animals. We were made in his image to give him glory.
We are humans. Not animals. But if you'd rather call yourself an animal......well that's up to you.
Careful - I'm a founding member of the local Animal Pride chapter.
Call yourself whatever you want. Your ignorance won't change the facts.
Unconstitutional? So would that mean that all such laws, regardless of who they apply to - are unconstitutional. I'd like to see your basis for this assetion.
I have! Hence:
Lula, you're just not seeing it. Yes, I admit that I am subjective when it comes to the issue because it's dear to my heart, but I'm sorry, it just doesn't excuse the injustice and bigotry that is prevalant.
Lula, my point isn't what you claim your intentions are, but what your actions show and the consequences from them. You may love the individual to high heaven, but you know...not everyone will see that. There are those who see your attack on their lifestyles (because their lifestyle is who they are, just like your being a christian is who you are...) as an attack on them. It's the same as when you feel attacked by secularists or atheists. Ok?
You see, my morals are not relative in the sense that they change constantly. I am merely aware enough to realize that not everyone is the same and that some, like you, view things differently and so on.
What I am trying to defend, is NOT the pushing of things onto others, but the rights of others...to live their lives as they see fit and to just love who they love, and have a life that doesn't include bigotry, hate, ignorance, etc. I'm on the side of love, peace, free will, justice, knowledge,etc. So, will I continue to fight for those who are being treated wrongly due to their sexual orientation or diginity? Yes. Will I also fight for those who are religious to believe what they want? Yes. And in fact, I believe that blood should be taken on the basis of whether or not the blood is good - not who/what they are. I do feel that the policy that is in place is fueled by ignorance and should be changed.
That's fine, I understand that not everyone can, but don't force others to accept your viewpoint, or as law; the world isn't just about you and your beliefs.
That being said, there is a difference between making someone accept it - and having it available for those who wish to obtain an abortion. I don't see how having the option out there as forcing it down your throat, perhaps you could enlighten me?
KFC, I've admitted that I am subjective. It's unfortunate and I'm working on it, but the fact is...I just don't see your objectivity when it comes to: Religion, politics, faith, etc. Time and time again I see you taking sides and failing to concede any opposing points- granted, I am guilty of this too. *raises hand* I admit it.
That being said, I commend you on striving to be objective. Hopefully it continues and maybe I could learn from you.
Indeed, lol. There's been some interesting debates.
Fact is KFC, you may say that you're this way, and again I commend you on striving toward it, but...time and again, you come across as extremely subjective. Now, I could be seeing things incorrectly, that's possible, but the fact is that maybe...like in my case, we go about things in a way that doesn't show our striving toward objectivity.
I'll admit, I do strive to be objective - but do fail to do so because I'm passionate about a number of issues.
KFC, I'm going to reply with this:
That being said, I have admited and conceded not just on the miss california issue, but in other things that the 'gay side,' as you called it, is wrong, and/or I am suspicious of their motive. I'm afraid you just haven't seen it. I do have a large fault in that however, because of how stubborn i am. I will say it again: I concede that there may possibly be foul play in the entire situation; the entire deal smells extremely fishy. I also comend her on speaking her voice when most people don't.
I apologize for trying your patience; it's unfortunate that my stubborness has caused this. If you're willing, I would like to offer an olive branch; a mea culpa.
Congratulations! And PETA is presently in a dither over Obama's swatting a fly?
Peta will be...peta.
Ok, Lucas, but if you're going to have a strong stance at least please back it up before you jump on the opposite bandwagon.
I think what you're seeing in me is my bias towards what you call my religion. I'm the first to admit I have bias. But you know what? Everyone has bias. But that's a diff animal than what we are talking about here. Even though I'm biased when it comes to anything dealing with God or biblical doctrine I'll be the first to admit if I see something wrong from another person just like me, or if I do it myself.
You have bias as well but you're not being very subjective or at least showing it here within your biased attitude. You automatically jump to the side that is as close to you as you can without knowing all the facts. That's what I'm talking about. I have no probem with your bias and can respect that's where you're coming from....even if I disagee. That's not what's bugging me here.
So I guess what I'm saying is it's ok to have your bias and be objective as well even if it means you're going against those that are of the same ilk. Wrong is wrong. For me, wrong is wrong even if they are a Christian. For you wrong is wrong even if they are homosexual.
Of course.
Likewise KFC, I've admitted the same; there are people, places, things, etc. that I find fishy, wrong or suspicious - who I would normally support.
Granted, I do tend to jump automatically; [ this ] might explain a bit when it comes to why I tend to do that.
Agreed.
nice answer. Calling me ignorant makes you feel better?
the fact that I'm supposed to consider myself an animal?
The fact is..... there is a big diff between opinions and facts.
Don't you know that kind of language and teaching is exactly why we have a society acting like animals today? We have people acting like brute beasts today because of such humanistic thinking. Take a good look at the news.
Go back and read some Darwin and Huxley while you're at it......
oh and I came across this quote the other day:
"In my eyes, both Adolf Hitler and my grandfather were false prophets of the 20th century" Sophie Freud retired Simmons College professor of psychology on her grandfather Signund Freud.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
