01 Jun 07
Originally posted by josephwWell I've read it, and I was raised as a Christian - did the Sunday School thing and all that. I would say my knowledge of scripture is introductory.
In principle I agree with some of your points. I constantly strive to examine my motives and will probably always need improvement. I'm certain of it.
But here we are again at that impasse. It seems to boil down to whether or not we were created. If so, then there are rules to live by, given to us by our maker.
I'll have to take issue with the "misguid ...[text shortened]... bible? I'm just asking because that would make for an interesting discussion. Do you think?
What I meant by misguided is in the sense of seeing scripture as some infallible and literal document rather than as a text written by people trying to understand experiences they were going through at a particular place and time.
01 Jun 07
Originally posted by josephwOooops, yes, Lewinski. Slip of the brain. Mind you, a Clinton - Lebowski thing would be an interesting proposition too - you ever seen "The Big Lebowski"?
I wish it were just about the capacity to do the job. Politics are ruining things. Power and control is the name of the game.
Oddly enough I think I would have had a great time partying with Bill. He's got a great personality. If he had been morally and ethically strait I think he could have gotten a 3rd term.
I think you mean Lewinski.
01 Jun 07
Originally posted by ivanhoeWhen the child asks, and the two women parents deem the child old enough to understand, the
Confused already ? ...... just wait till the child starts asking questions and wants to know who his father is.
child should be informed as to the nature of its conception just like any other child in any other
relationship. If the child was conceived by anonymous donor, then that child ought to be informed
in the same way as if the child was conceived by an anonymous donor in a heterosexual, infertile
marriage.
What's the big problem here, Ivanhoe? You're acting as if this is a complicated question for two
responsible parents to address.
Nemesio
08 Jun 07
Originally posted by Jay JoosIt was a solicitation for Ivanhoe to respond to my well-thought out
You call that a informed and clever post Nemesio.... look closer to home before you put me down!!!!
post above. Ivanhoe has a notorious history of asking questions and
not answering those posed to him (or ignoring the answer).
Of course, it relies on your reading more than a single post to assess
context, but that's probably how you read the Bible (one verse at a time)
so I should probably expect it.
As for looking closer to home: I'm sure Jesus would be proud of your
post to me, though.
Nemesio
12 Jun 07
1 edit
Originally posted by NemesioNot only that Nemesio.
It was a solicitation for Ivanhoe to respond to my well-thought out
post above. Ivanhoe has a notorious history of asking questions and
not answering those posed to him (or ignoring the answer).
Of course, it relies on your reading more than a single post to assess
context, but that's probably how you read the Bible (one verse at a time)
so I shoul ...[text shortened]... looking closer to home: I'm sure Jesus would be proud of your
post to me, though.
Nemesio
Your post where so good it seemd to stop him in his traks...
good job
Edit:that is why i gave you a recomendation...
13 Jun 07
Originally posted by kirksey957And I thought advocates of the whole "Gay adoption" thing said it was all about the child. Of course those of us on the conservative side were just being "bigots" for suggesting that this was all really just a back-door to try and get "gay marriage" on to the statutes.
This ain't about the baby. Shouldn't Christians see this as an event in which gays should be allowed to marry so as this child doesn't grow up with a bastard identity? This is about family values.