| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"= Vox Populi ©" |
| Date: |
28 Feb 2004 11:11:54 AM |
| Object: |
Re: The Top Ten Conservative Idiots (No. 144) |
Uncle Samuel wrote:
On 27 Feb 2004 12:22:35 -0800, (Matt Telles)
wrote:
Uncle Samuel <stars@bars> wrote in message
news:<0cqs30h8l3ma5uejj7iiccud8vvcaqb8e7@4ax.com>...
On 26 Feb 2004 06:01:40 -0800, (Matt Telles)
wrote:
Uncle Samuel <stars@bars> wrote in message
news:<o3fq3014c1g4ci137hb9213evdp6i9vpfv@4ax.com>...
On 25 Feb 2004 10:55:18 -0800, (Matt
Telles)
wrote:
No, marriage was not invented for a woman and a man.
You witless moron!
If you can cite
where this is true, we can discuss it.
http://www.stcatherine.org/marriage.html
Sigh. You are such a schmuck, Unkie. You honestly believe that
marriage in its myriad forms does not predate the bible??
You're such a putz, do you honestly believe biblical/religious
history
is NOT the applicable definitive?
Yes, that's what I believe.
Yup, yer an idiot.
You may disagree, but citing the Bible
will not aid your cause.
It defines the idiom.
You could say that we should be more of a
religious state, if that's what you believe. I don't think you will
get a lot of votes.
I'm not looking for votes.
But you won't be able to.
Ooops, you did it again!
http://www.stcatherine.org/marriage.html
In the New Testament, all three Synoptic Gospels record Jesus
affirming the permanence of marriage. In both Mark and Matthew,
Jesus
makes reference to Gen. 2:24 which speaks of the union of man and
woman as part of God's divine plan.
Oh good, now he cites the New Testament as a source for facts.
ROFL.
Sure, and here's another relevant biblically based reference for ya.
http://www.alliance4lifemin.org/amchristii.html
<snip>
We still aren't a nation governed by the Bible.
Never said we were.
Maybe you want to
change that, but until you do, we aren't
Never said I wanted to change it though, did I?
So citations like the above don't matter.
And neither do British Common Law nor the Code of Hammurabia, right
mattie?
There is no history, there are no precedents, it's all a swirling mass
of relativism, right?
If it ain't relative Spammy you worthless worm, then why aren't you
strictly practicing the command of your pathetic gaawd in the holey
babble ...?'
Exo 31:15 Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of
rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he
shall surely be put to death.
Lev 24:16 And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely
be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as
well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the
name of the LORD, shall be put to death.
Josh 1:18 Whosoever he be that doth rebel against thy commandment, and
will not hearken unto thy words in all that thou commandest him, he shall
be put to death: only be strong and of a good courage.
2 Chr 15:13 That whosoever would not seek the LORD God of Israel should be
put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.
Ezekiel 4:12
And thou shalt eat it as barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with dung that
cometh out of man, in their sight.
4:13
And the LORD said, Even thus shall the children of Israel eat their defiled
bread among the Gentiles, whither I will drive them.
4:15
Then he said unto me, Lo, I have given thee cow's dung for man's dung, and thou
shalt prepare thy bread therewith.
2 Kings, 18:27:
Hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may
eat their own dung, and drink their own ***** with you?
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them
sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)
Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the
name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian,
that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder
because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths,
Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)
The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he
refused to do it. "But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will
be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given,
and much more is required from those to whom much more is given." (Luke
12:47-48 NLT)
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NAB
If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged,
he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young
woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
Deuteronomy 22:23-24 NAB
If within the city a man comes upon a maiden who is betrothed, and has
relations with her, you shall bring them both out of the gate of the city and
there stone them to death: the girl because she did not cry out for help
though she was in the city, and the man because he violated his neighbors wife.
2 Samuel 12:11-14 NAB
Thus says the Lord: 'I will bring evil upon you out of your own house.
I will take your wives (plural) while you live to see it, and will give them to
your neighbor. He shall lie with your wives in broad daylight. You have
done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all
Israel,
and with the sun looking down.'
Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord."
Nathan answered David: "The Lord on his part has forgiven your sin:
you shall not die. But since you have utterly spurned the Lord by this deed,
the child born to you must surely die." (The child dies seven days later.)
Deuteronomy 21:10-14 NLT
Suppose you go to war against your enemies and the LORD your God
hands them over to you and you take captives. And suppose you see
among the captives a beautiful woman, and you are attracted to her and
want to marry her. If this happens, you may take her to your home,
where she must shave her head, cut her fingernails, and change all
her clothes. Then she must remain in your home for a full month,
mourning for her father and mother. After that you may marry her.
But if you marry her and then decide you do not like her, you must
let her go free. You may not sell her or treat her as a slave,
for you have humiliated her.
It's all just bigotry and racism Spammy, something for you white-trash
pigs to hide behind whilst you carry out your perversions and abuse of
others.
***** you Spammy, ***** your god, ***** your religion and ***** what it stands for!
.... and ***** your mother for bringing a piece of ***** like you into this world.
.
|
|
| User: "Uncle Samuel stars@bars" |
|
| Title: Re: The Top Ten Conservative Idiots (No. 144) |
28 Feb 2004 01:46:49 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 10:11:54 -0700, "=> Vox Populi ©" <vox@popu.li>
wrote:
Uncle Samuel wrote:
On 27 Feb 2004 12:22:35 -0800, (Matt Telles)
wrote:
Uncle Samuel <stars@bars> wrote in message
news:<0cqs30h8l3ma5uejj7iiccud8vvcaqb8e7@4ax.com>...
On 26 Feb 2004 06:01:40 -0800, (Matt Telles)
wrote:
Uncle Samuel <stars@bars> wrote in message
news:<o3fq3014c1g4ci137hb9213evdp6i9vpfv@4ax.com>...
On 25 Feb 2004 10:55:18 -0800, (Matt
Telles)
wrote:
No, marriage was not invented for a woman and a man.
You witless moron!
If you can cite
where this is true, we can discuss it.
http://www.stcatherine.org/marriage.html
Sigh. You are such a schmuck, Unkie. You honestly believe that
marriage in its myriad forms does not predate the bible??
You're such a putz, do you honestly believe biblical/religious
history
is NOT the applicable definitive?
Yes, that's what I believe.
Yup, yer an idiot.
You may disagree, but citing the Bible
will not aid your cause.
It defines the idiom.
You could say that we should be more of a
religious state, if that's what you believe. I don't think you will
get a lot of votes.
I'm not looking for votes.
But you won't be able to.
Ooops, you did it again!
http://www.stcatherine.org/marriage.html
In the New Testament, all three Synoptic Gospels record Jesus
affirming the permanence of marriage. In both Mark and Matthew,
Jesus
makes reference to Gen. 2:24 which speaks of the union of man and
woman as part of God's divine plan.
Oh good, now he cites the New Testament as a source for facts.
ROFL.
Sure, and here's another relevant biblically based reference for ya.
http://www.alliance4lifemin.org/amchristii.html
<snip>
We still aren't a nation governed by the Bible.
Never said we were.
Maybe you want to
change that, but until you do, we aren't
Never said I wanted to change it though, did I?
So citations like the above don't matter.
And neither do British Common Law nor the Code of Hammurabia, right
mattie?
There is no history, there are no precedents, it's all a swirling mass
of relativism, right?
If it ain't relative Spammy you worthless worm, then why aren't you
strictly practicing the command of your pathetic gaawd in the holey
babble ...?'
God gave man free will, I exercise it regularly.
***** YOU TO HELL!
.
|
|
|
| User: "= Vox Populi ©" |
|
| Title: Re: The Top Ten Conservative Idiots (No. 144) |
29 Feb 2004 04:35:52 PM |
|
|
Uncle Samuel wrote:
On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 10:11:54 -0700, "=> Vox Populi ©" <vox@popu.li>
wrote:
Uncle Samuel wrote:
On 27 Feb 2004 12:22:35 -0800, (Matt Telles)
wrote:
Uncle Samuel <stars@bars> wrote in message
news:<0cqs30h8l3ma5uejj7iiccud8vvcaqb8e7@4ax.com>...
On 26 Feb 2004 06:01:40 -0800, (Matt
Telles) wrote:
Uncle Samuel <stars@bars> wrote in message
news:<o3fq3014c1g4ci137hb9213evdp6i9vpfv@4ax.com>...
On 25 Feb 2004 10:55:18 -0800, (Matt
Telles)
wrote:
No, marriage was not invented for a woman and a man.
You witless moron!
If you can cite
where this is true, we can discuss it.
http://www.stcatherine.org/marriage.html
Sigh. You are such a schmuck, Unkie. You honestly believe that
marriage in its myriad forms does not predate the bible??
You're such a putz, do you honestly believe biblical/religious
history
is NOT the applicable definitive?
Yes, that's what I believe.
Yup, yer an idiot.
You may disagree, but citing the Bible
will not aid your cause.
It defines the idiom.
You could say that we should be more of a
religious state, if that's what you believe. I don't think you will
get a lot of votes.
I'm not looking for votes.
But you won't be able to.
Ooops, you did it again!
http://www.stcatherine.org/marriage.html
In the New Testament, all three Synoptic Gospels record Jesus
affirming the permanence of marriage. In both Mark and Matthew,
Jesus
makes reference to Gen. 2:24 which speaks of the union of man
and woman as part of God's divine plan.
Oh good, now he cites the New Testament as a source for facts.
ROFL.
Sure, and here's another relevant biblically based reference for
ya.
http://www.alliance4lifemin.org/amchristii.html
<snip>
We still aren't a nation governed by the Bible.
Never said we were.
Maybe you want to
change that, but until you do, we aren't
Never said I wanted to change it though, did I?
So citations like the above don't matter.
And neither do British Common Law nor the Code of Hammurabia, right
mattie?
There is no history, there are no precedents, it's all a swirling
mass of relativism, right?
If it ain't relative Spammy you worthless worm, then why aren't you
strictly practicing the command of your pathetic gaawd in the holey
babble ...?'
God gave man free will, I exercise it regularly.
So it is all realative, ain't it Spammy?
***** YOU TO HELL!
Naw, ***** your mother in the ***** for bringing a lowlife piece
of ***** like you into this world.
Any questions?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Samuel stars@bars" |
|
| Title: Re: The Top Ten Conservative Idiots (No. 144) |
29 Feb 2004 06:16:12 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 29 Feb 2004 15:35:52 -0700, "=> Vox Populi ©" <vox@popu.li>
wrote:
Uncle Samuel wrote:
On Sat, 28 Feb 2004 10:11:54 -0700, "=> Vox Populi ©" <vox@popu.li>
wrote:
Uncle Samuel wrote:
On 27 Feb 2004 12:22:35 -0800, (Matt Telles)
wrote:
Uncle Samuel <stars@bars> wrote in message
news:<0cqs30h8l3ma5uejj7iiccud8vvcaqb8e7@4ax.com>...
On 26 Feb 2004 06:01:40 -0800, (Matt
Telles) wrote:
Uncle Samuel <stars@bars> wrote in message
news:<o3fq3014c1g4ci137hb9213evdp6i9vpfv@4ax.com>...
On 25 Feb 2004 10:55:18 -0800, (Matt
Telles)
wrote:
No, marriage was not invented for a woman and a man.
You witless moron!
If you can cite
where this is true, we can discuss it.
http://www.stcatherine.org/marriage.html
Sigh. You are such a schmuck, Unkie. You honestly believe that
marriage in its myriad forms does not predate the bible??
You're such a putz, do you honestly believe biblical/religious
history
is NOT the applicable definitive?
Yes, that's what I believe.
Yup, yer an idiot.
You may disagree, but citing the Bible
will not aid your cause.
It defines the idiom.
You could say that we should be more of a
religious state, if that's what you believe. I don't think you will
get a lot of votes.
I'm not looking for votes.
But you won't be able to.
Ooops, you did it again!
http://www.stcatherine.org/marriage.html
In the New Testament, all three Synoptic Gospels record Jesus
affirming the permanence of marriage. In both Mark and Matthew,
Jesus
makes reference to Gen. 2:24 which speaks of the union of man
and woman as part of God's divine plan.
Oh good, now he cites the New Testament as a source for facts.
ROFL.
Sure, and here's another relevant biblically based reference for
ya.
http://www.alliance4lifemin.org/amchristii.html
<snip>
We still aren't a nation governed by the Bible.
Never said we were.
Maybe you want to
change that, but until you do, we aren't
Never said I wanted to change it though, did I?
So citations like the above don't matter.
And neither do British Common Law nor the Code of Hammurabia, right
mattie?
There is no history, there are no precedents, it's all a swirling
mass of relativism, right?
If it ain't relative Spammy you worthless worm, then why aren't you
strictly practicing the command of your pathetic gaawd in the holey
babble ...?'
God gave man free will, I exercise it regularly.
So it is all realative, ain't it Spammy?
Within a pre-ordained range.
***** YOU TO HELL!
Naw, ***** your mother
No ***** YOU!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
