On Nov 2, 7:56*pm, Michelle Steiner wrote:
In article ,
wrote:

I'm still looking for just one government program that will benefit
me, a minority.

You haven't shown that you're a minority. *Oh wait, yes you have; the
feeble minded are a minority.

Only a member of that minority even knows it's a minority and who is
and who isn't a member. Thus we can safely postulate that you to are
feeble minded.

--
keith

In article , Ray Fischer
wrote:

Jerry Kindall wrote:
In article , Ray Fischer
wrote:

Wrong again. The Christian sabbath is SUNDAY.

There is no such thing as "the Christian Sabbath."

Sabbath
(often the Sabbath) a day of religious observance and abstinence
from work, kept by Jews from Friday evening to Saturday evening,
and by most Christians on Sunday.
New Oxford American Dictionary

A lot of people have mistaken notions of what the Sabbath actually is,
but that doesn't mean they're not mistaken.

The whole concept of a "day of abstinence from work" is strictly
Jewish. Christians don't buy appliances with Shabbat modes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shabbat_mode

Perhaps people who use the term think that Sabbath just means a holy
day rather than specifically a day of rest. In that sense I suppose
you could call Sunday "the Christian Sabbath." It isn't very accurate
if you know anything about Judaism, though.

--
Jerry Kindall, Seattle, WA http://www.jerrykindall.com/

Send only plain text messages under 32K to the Reply-To address.
This mailbox is filtered aggressively to thwart spam and viruses.

Jerry Kindall wrote:
Ray Fischer
Jerry Kindall wrote:

Wrong again. The Christian sabbath is SUNDAY.

There is no such thing as "the Christian Sabbath."

Sabbath
(often the Sabbath) a day of religious observance and abstinence
from work, kept by Jews from Friday evening to Saturday evening,
and by most Christians on Sunday.
New Oxford American Dictionary

A lot of people have mistaken notions of what the Sabbath actually is,
but that doesn't mean they're not mistaken.

Look in the mirror.

The whole concept of a "day of abstinence from work" is strictly
Jewish. Christians don't buy appliances with Shabbat modes.

Sabbath
1 a: the seventh day of the week observed from Friday evening to
Saturday evening as a day of rest and worship by Jews and some
Christians b: Sunday observed among Christians as a day of rest
and worship
2: a time of rest
Mirriam Webster Dictionary

Need more? I think that you'll find that pretty much everybody knows
the Christian Sabbath to be Sunday, and your (borderline anti-Semitic)
interpretation to be bizarre.

--
Ray Fischer

Outback Jon wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Outback Jon wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Outback Jon wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
HEMI-Powered wrote:
Here's the part of the Bible I believe it: adultery is punished by
death by stoning and queers are beaten in the streets.
That isn't from the Bible.
You're right, it's the homosexuals who get put to death:

Leviticus 20:13
The entire book of Leviticus applies only to the Israelites.

However, YOU should be put to death for working on the Sabbath. As
you are the one advocating killing people for not following Old
Testaent rules I expect that you will agree that you should be put to
death, by your own standards.
I didn't advocate anything. Nor did I in any way imply that my
standards and Biblical standards are one and the same. I merely pointed
out that the laws put forth in the Bible stated that homosexuals and
adulterers were to be put to death.

Except that it does NOT say that, and you are either being willfully
ignorant or lying.

Excuse me, but you're the one being willfully ignorant.

Leviticus 20:10 -

Applies only to the Israelites.

Both of those passages seem to be quite clear to me.

Maybe you should read the last passage in the book.

These are the commands the LORD gave Moses on Mount Sinai for the
Israelites.
Lev 27:31

And, the Sabbath is generally considered to be what is commonly referred
to as "Saturday".

Wrong again. The Christian sabbath is SUNDAY.

I fail to see where I stated that I was Christian. Or Jewish. Or any
religion for that matter.

Then you hardly have any justification for citing the Bible as a
source for any law.

--
Ray Fischer

Wow...Us whites are already a minority.

Actually, we are a super majority; 66% of the population.


I was referring to world population... Us is us, not U.S.

added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 13:14:34 -0700 (PDT), LOVE Europe HATE the
EU wrote:

America 2042: WHITE MINORITY, the country you have left for
your kids

As a percentage of world inhabitants, the white population
will plummet to a single digit (9.76%) by 2060 from a
high-water mark of 27.98% in 1950.

Wow...Us whites are already a minority. Where can we sign up
for government run equalization programs set up to help us?
Signed ...The imposed upon and rapidly shrinking minority.

Please list such programs.............

start by soundly defeating Hussein NObama, he's the leader of the
enemy right now

--
HP, aka Jerry

NOT Marxism "To each according to his needs, from each according to
his abilities" - Karl Marx from "The Communist Manifesto"
NOT Hate such as "No, no, no, not God Bless American, God DAMN
America" - Rev. Jeremy Wright
NOT hate such as Black Libaration Theology as easpoused by James
Cone

But -- No Way, No How, No Marxism, NObama!

Bob Myers added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....


"S'mee" wrote in message

ups.com...
8^) Because I can THINK objectively and critcally. I read
THEN instead of forming an opinion I think.


Good Gawd, man, don't you realize what a threat to
modern civilization something like that could be?

Clearly, you need to be stoned to death at the earliest
opportunity. We simply can't have this sort of thing
spreading.


You can prove that entropy exsists. You can not prove the
exsistants of any deities.

With the obvious exception of His Noodly Holiness, of course.

By all means, YES. Stone the Far Left Loons, all the Canucks who
dare meddle in our affairs, and ANY/ALL assholes who would attempt
to steal our money and give it to the stupid and the lazy. For a
start, defeat Hussein NObama and his Band of Merry Queers in
Congress.

--
HP, aka Jerry

NOT Marxism "To each according to his needs, from each according to
his abilities" - Karl Marx from "The Communist Manifesto"
NOT Hate such as "No, no, no, not God Bless American, God DAMN
America" - Rev. Jeremy Wright
NOT hate such as Black Libaration Theology as easpoused by James
Cone

But -- No Way, No How, No Marxism, NObama!

Ray Fischer added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

Outback Jon wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Outback Jon wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
HEMI-Powered wrote:
Here's the part of the Bible I believe it: adultery is
punished by death by stoning and queers are beaten in the
streets. That isn't from the Bible.
You're right, it's the homosexuals who get put to death:

Leviticus 20:13

The entire book of Leviticus applies only to the Israelites.

However, YOU should be put to death for working on the
Sabbath. As you are the one advocating killing people for
not following Old Testaent rules I expect that you will
agree that you should be put to death, by your own
standards.

I didn't advocate anything. Nor did I in any way imply that
my standards and Biblical standards are one and the same. I
merely pointed out that the laws put forth in the Bible stated
that homosexuals and adulterers were to be put to death.

Except that it does NOT say that, and you are either being
willfully ignorant or lying.

Best read it again - queers ARE forbidden by the Bible and it
DOES define marriage as a union between a man and a woman and NOT
between two queers who want to butt **** each other while
stealing marriage tax advantages. if you want to be married, find
a person of the opposite gender. personally, my penalty is the
same as the Old Testament for both queers and adulters - stoning
to death. Had the peoples of the world done that diligently we'd
not have a problem today with so many queers ****ing up the
language with bull**** words like "gay".

And, the Sabbath is generally considered to be what is
commonly referred to as "Saturday".

Wrong again. The Christian sabbath is SUNDAY.

So, you're wrong twice again.

Stupid bigot




--
HP, aka Jerry

NOT Marxism "To each according to his needs, from each according
to his abilities" - Karl Marx from "The Communist Manifesto"
NOT Hate such as "No, no, no, not God Bless American, God DAMN
America" - Rev. Jeremy Wright
NOT hate such as Black Libaration Theology as easpoused by James
Cone

But -- No Way, No How, No Marxism, NObama!

Jerry Kindall added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

In article , Ray
Fischer wrote:

Jerry Kindall wrote:
In article , Ray
Fischer wrote:

Wrong again. The Christian sabbath is SUNDAY.

There is no such thing as "the Christian Sabbath."

Sabbath
(often the Sabbath) a day of religious observance and
abstinence from work, kept by Jews from Friday evening to
Saturday evening, and by most Christians on Sunday. New
Oxford American Dictionary

A lot of people have mistaken notions of what the Sabbath
actually is, but that doesn't mean they're not mistaken.

The whole concept of a "day of abstinence from work" is
strictly Jewish. Christians don't buy appliances with Shabbat
modes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shabbat_mode

Perhaps people who use the term think that Sabbath just means
a holy day rather than specifically a day of rest. In that
sense I suppose you could call Sunday "the Christian Sabbath."
It isn't very accurate if you know anything about Judaism,
though.

you Loons are attempting to apply modern definitions of a "day"
but by far, most people believe that Creation ran from Monday to
Saturday and that God rested on the 7th Day, which became Sunday
in modern times. what's wrong with that?


--
HP, aka Jerry

NOT Marxism "To each according to his needs, from each according
to his abilities" - Karl Marx from "The Communist Manifesto"
NOT Hate such as "No, no, no, not God Bless American, God DAMN
America" - Rev. Jeremy Wright
NOT hate such as Black Libaration Theology as easpoused by James
Cone

But -- No Way, No How, No Marxism, NObama!

Outback Jon added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

Ray Fischer wrote:
Outback Jon wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Outback Jon wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
HEMI-Powered wrote:
Here's the part of the Bible I believe it: adultery is
punished by death by stoning and queers are beaten in
the streets. That isn't from the Bible.
You're right, it's the homosexuals who get put to death:

Leviticus 20:13
The entire book of Leviticus applies only to the
Israelites.

However, YOU should be put to death for working on the
Sabbath. As you are the one advocating killing people for
not following Old Testaent rules I expect that you will
agree that you should be put to death, by your own
standards.
I didn't advocate anything. Nor did I in any way imply that
my standards and Biblical standards are one and the same. I
merely pointed out that the laws put forth in the Bible
stated that homosexuals and adulterers were to be put to
death.

Except that it does NOT say that, and you are either being
willfully ignorant or lying.

Excuse me, but you're the one being willfully ignorant.

Leviticus 20:10 - If a man commits adultery with another man's
wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the
adulteress must be put to death.

Leviticus 20:13 - If a man lies with a man as one lies with a
woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be
put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

Both of those passages seem to be quite clear to me.

me, too. same penalty for the queers, which the Bible terms an
"abomination." Nice play on words for Cursey's book "Obama
Nation", BTW


And, the Sabbath is generally considered to be what is
commonly referred to as "Saturday".

Wrong again. The Christian sabbath is SUNDAY.

I fail to see where I stated that I was Christian. Or Jewish.
Or any religion for that matter.


So, you're wrong twice again.

Stupid bigot


I fail to see how I am a "bigot". I'm not advocating the
killing of adulterers or homosexuals. I merely provided a
reference to the Biblical passage that *does* call for their
deaths. I have in no way stated whether I agree or disagree
with that passage. Nor do I intend to make such a statement.




--
HP, aka Jerry

NOT Marxism "To each according to his needs, from each according
to his abilities" - Karl Marx from "The Communist Manifesto"
NOT Hate such as "No, no, no, not God Bless American, God DAMN
America" - Rev. Jeremy Wright
NOT hate such as Black Libaration Theology as easpoused by James
Cone

But -- No Way, No How, No Marxism, NObama!

S'mee added these comments in the current discussion du jour ...

On Nov 2, 8:46*pm, Outback Jon
wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Outback Jon wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Outback Jon wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
HEMI-Powered wrote:
Here's the part of the Bible I believe it: adultery is
punished by death by stoning and queers are beaten in
the streets. That isn't from the Bible. You're right,
it's the homosexuals who get put to death:

Leviticus 20:13
The entire book of Leviticus applies only to the
Israelites.

However, YOU should be put to death for working on the
Sabbath. *As you are the one advocating killing people
for not following Old Testaent rules I expect that you
will agree that you should be put to death, by your own
standards.
I didn't advocate anything. *Nor did I in any way imply
that my standards and Biblical standards are one and the
same. *I merely poi nted out that the laws put forth in
the Bible stated that homosexuals and adulterers were to
be put to death.

Except that it does NOT say that, and you are either being
willfully ignorant or lying.

Excuse me, but you're the one being willfully ignorant.

Leviticus 20:10 - If a man commits adultery with another
man's wife—wit h the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer
and the adulteress must be put to death.

Leviticus 20:13 - If a man lies with a man as one lies with a
woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must
be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

Both of those passages seem to be quite clear to me.

Really? Then are you aware it ONLY applies to levites and they
were jewish. One can then argue succesfully that it doesn't
apply to members of the christian cult. Nor the Islamic cult
or any other religious cult. It also doesn't apply to me and I
dare anybody to start thorwing stones while I work whatever
day I wish.

Jews, elephant jockies, camel jockies, whatever. God only refers
to "people" and His Law applies to all no matter how any
religions may have perverted His Law over the millenia. But, all
sinners must face their maker when they die, including the
queers, so justice will eventually prevail

And, the Sabbath is generally considered to be what is
commonly referr ed to as "Saturday".

Wrong again. *The Christian sabbath is SUNDAY.

I fail to see where I stated that I was Christian. *Or
Jewish. *Or an y religion for that matter.

You did imply it. Not intentionally but to some knuckleheads
you did imply your membership in one of those faiths. shrug
Me I make no guesses and I'm not worried either way. Were I
you I'd consider his comment a straw man.

So, you're wrong twice again.

Stupid bigot

I fail to see how I am a "bigot". *I'm not advocating the
killing of adulterers or homosexuals. *I merely provided a
reference to the Biblical passage that *does* call for their
deaths. *I have in no way stated whether I agree or disagree
with that passage. *Nor do I intend to make such a statement.

It is safe to say evreybody on the planet is bigoted to one
exstent or another.
--
Keith




--
HP, aka Jerry

NOT Marxism "To each according to his needs, from each according
to his abilities" - Karl Marx from "The Communist Manifesto"
NOT Hate such as "No, no, no, not God Bless American, God DAMN
America" - Rev. Jeremy Wright
NOT hate such as Black Libaration Theology as easpoused by James
Cone

But -- No Way, No How, No Marxism, NObama!

"HEMI-Powered" wrote:
[...]. personally, my penalty is the
same as the Old Testament for both queers and adulters - stoning
to death. Had the peoples of the world done that diligently we'd
not have a problem today with so many queers ****ing up the
language with bull**** words like "gay".

Oh Lord, save us from your followers!!!

I would have never thought such hatred would be possible in a modern
society. I stand corrected.

jue

Ray Fischer wrote:

Michelle Steiner wrote:
In article om,
"Vito" wrote:

Yet many demand we treat Muslins with understanding.

Not just muslin, but also percale, linen, nylon, and rayon.

Especially linen. Just look at it funny and it'll wrinkle.

Personally I shun polyester. I will not agree to talk with it ever
again. Not since it offended my honour in the 80's!
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

J. Clarke wrote:

S'mee wrote:
On Nov 2, 12:04 pm, "J. Clarke" wrote:
S'mee wrote:
On Nov 2, 10:18 am, "J. Clarke" wrote:
S'mee wrote:
On Nov 2, 4:58 am, "HEMI-Powered" wrote:

Here's the part of the Bible I believe it: adultery is punished
by
death by stoning and queers are beaten in the streets. Have a
problem with that? Then take it up with God.

It's just a damned fairytail dude! IF there was some invisible
man
telling me what to do I'd check into a psychiatric facility in
siberia. Just like all fairtails it does tell SOME morals. BUT
unlike
most fairytails it's so contradictiory and full of political
LIES
from
various power hungery priests (there has NEVER been a priest
that
didn't covet power)

Nope it's all smoke, mirrors, lies leading us all to a death
dance
that ends in nothing. Those too weak to stand have religion,
those
strong enough to stand do so with ease and pity the weak while
showing
no mercy. La Belle' Dame sans Merci is holding court...and
nobody
feels any pity, not even for themselves.

So where have you stood that puts you on a level with religious
weaklings such as King, Tutu, and Gandhi?

I Didn't a god to tell me what to think adn I figured it out for my
self...so the REAL question is. "If Keith can firgure it out.Without
the crutch of religion or faith. Why can't the rest of you idiots do
it?"

What makes you think you've figured anything out?

8^) Because I can THINK objectively and critcally. I read THEN instead
of forming an opinion I think. Something that is LACKING in america and
many other countries. I can find no evidence of any gods/ goddesess.
There are no so called religious tracts that do not contradict
themselves to the point of negating all believability. What can not be
proven therefore must either be non-exsistant or made up.

Well, that's not exactly the case. Logically it makes it highly unlikely
given the mountain of evidence or lack thereof that discredits religion,
but not impossible. However quite why people are so ready to believe
that for which there is no proof (or even a decent likelihood) still
escapes me. OTOH I retain the belief that humanity can better itself...
perhaps I'm just as insane as these religious fanatics...

In other words you have an opinion and an asshole, just like everybody
else.

An opinion backed up by logic, rational thought, human, natural and
geological history...

You can prove that entropy exsists. You can not prove the exsistants
of any deities.

Your point being?

Don't worry, it's to do with reason - so is lost on you.
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Michelle Steiner wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

I'm still looking for just one government program that will benefit
me, a minority.

You haven't shown that you're a minority. Oh wait, yes you have; the
feeble minded are a minority.

Sadly I have to disagree with you on that point :-(
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

Ray Fischer wrote:
Then you hardly have any justification for citing the Bible as a
source for any law.


Do you work at being this dense? Or are you just delusional?

You stated that being put to death for adultery wasn't in the Bible. I
merely provided a cite of the facts that it *is* in the Bible. I made
no attempt to apply it to *anyone*. Or to cite it as *law*.

My cite shows that being put to death for adultery/homosexuality is in
fact in the Bible. Nothing more, nothing less. Every version of the
Bible I've seen has the book of Leviticus. Whether it applies to anyone
specific, or not, it's in there.

--
"Outback" Jon - KC2BNE

AMD Opteron 165 ) and 6.1 GHz of other AMD power...
http://folding.stanford.edu - got folding? Team 53560

2006 ZG1000A Concours "Blueline" COG# 7385 CDA# 0157

Jürgen Exner wrote:

"HEMI-Powered" wrote:
[...]. personally, my penalty is the
same as the Old Testament for both queers and adulters - stoning
to death. Had the peoples of the world done that diligently we'd
not have a problem today with so many queers ****ing up the
language with bull**** words like "gay".

Oh Lord, save us from your followers!!!

I would have never thought such hatred would be possible in a modern
society. I stand corrected.

jue

The sheer hypocrisy is almost funny, isn't it? (were it not so
disturbing...)
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

In article , Ray Fischer
wrote:

Jerry Kindall wrote:
Ray Fischer
Jerry Kindall wrote:

Wrong again. The Christian sabbath is SUNDAY.

There is no such thing as "the Christian Sabbath."

Sabbath
(often the Sabbath) a day of religious observance and abstinence
from work, kept by Jews from Friday evening to Saturday evening,
and by most Christians on Sunday.
New Oxford American Dictionary

A lot of people have mistaken notions of what the Sabbath actually is,
but that doesn't mean they're not mistaken.

Look in the mirror.

The whole concept of a "day of abstinence from work" is strictly
Jewish. Christians don't buy appliances with Shabbat modes.

Sabbath
1 a: the seventh day of the week observed from Friday evening to
Saturday evening as a day of rest and worship by Jews and some
Christians b: Sunday observed among Christians as a day of rest
and worship
2: a time of rest
Mirriam Webster Dictionary

Need more? I think that you'll find that pretty much everybody knows
the Christian Sabbath to be Sunday, and your (borderline anti-Semitic)
interpretation to be bizarre.

As I said in the part you elided, perhaps people simply consider the
Sabbath to be a generic "day of rest and worship." In that sense,
sure, Sunday could be considered "the Christian Sabbath." So that
definition isn't wrong _per_se,_ and I'm sure it's how most Christians
use the word. Since there are so many Christians, naturally their
definition will make it into dictionaries.

But to me, calling something "a Sabbath" when it lacks an essential
Sabbath practice -- complete abstinence from labor -- observed for
thousands of years longer than Christianity has even existed by the
people who invented the very idea -- well, that looks a whole lot like
missing the point. I don't see how one can take away the very core of
something yet continue to call it by the same name.

It's hard to imagine how my comments could be construed as borderline
anti-Semitic. If anything, I'd expect that accusing Christians of
misappropriating the word "Sabbath" for a practice so distinctly unlike
the Jewish Sabbath would earn me an accusation of being borderline
anti-Christian! Fortunately, Christianity is not so weak that it can't
withstand occasional criticism. (Nor, for that matter, is Judaism.)

This kind of discussion is not really why I come to Mac newsgroups,
though, and I regret being sucked in, so I'll bow out now. Those who
write the dictionaries may continue apace.

--
Jerry Kindall, Seattle, WA http://www.jerrykindall.com/

Send only plain text messages under 32K to the Reply-To address.
This mailbox is filtered aggressively to thwart spam and viruses.

"Ray Fischer" wrote
Evolution. Dark skin to protect from the sun, light skin to take
advantage of the sun.

Trouble is skin color isn't all that evolved. Faced with changing seasons
and harsher environments people had to paln ahead and work harder. Those
who did survived and passed these traits on just as they did skin color or
eye shape. Hunter-Gatherers who lived for the moment and failed to store
food for winter did not survive - except back in Africa. Why didn't
Africans domesticate Zebra or Elephants? Because there was no need, no
survival advantage. But their wandering cousins did.

"Vito" wrote in message
g.com...
"Ray Fischer" wrote
Evolution. Dark skin to protect from the sun, light skin to take
advantage of the sun.

Trouble is skin color isn't all that evolved. Faced with changing seasons
and harsher environments people had to paln ahead and work harder. Those
who did survived and passed these traits on just as they did skin color or
eye shape.

And exactly what evidence can you present to support the
notion of racial differences in planning ability or the ability to
"work harder," (whatever that might mean)?

Bob M.

"HEMI-Powered" wrote in message
...
you Loons are attempting to apply modern definitions of a "day"
but by far, most people believe that Creation ran from Monday to
Saturday and that God rested on the 7th Day, which became Sunday
in modern times.

Let's be accurate - most people, at least most of those who
managed to get beyond an 8th-grade education, don't believe
in the whole Genesis creation myth as literal truth in the first
place.

Bob M.

"HEMI-Powered" wrote in message
...
start by soundly defeating Hussein NObama, he's the leader of the
enemy right now

Let's talk again on Wednesday, shall we?

Bob M.

"HEMI-Powered" wrote in message
...
Best read it again - queers ARE forbidden by the Bible and it
DOES define marriage as a union between a man and a woman and NOT
between two queers who want to butt **** each other while
stealing marriage tax advantages. if you want to be married, find
a person of the opposite gender. personally, my penalty is the
same as the Old Testament for both queers and adulters - stoning
to death.

Just curious - besides John 8:7, what other parts of that
book you claim is "holy" do you choose to ignore?

Bob M.

On Nov 3, 10:42*am, "Vito" wrote:

Trouble is skin color isn't all that evolved.

Sieg Heil, sucker.*

*Why didn't Africans domesticate Zebra or Elephants? Because there was no need, no
survival advantage. *But their wandering cousins did.

Oh dear. A racist who claims to know all about the small differences
between human types but who doesn't even know the difference between
horses and zebras or African and Indian elephants.

(Clue: Nobody of any race has ever successfully domesticated either
zebras *or* African elephants in any great numbers. This is because
both species tend to kill the people who try.)

Vito wrote:

Why didn't
Africans domesticate Zebra or Elephants? Because there was no need, no
survival advantage. But their wandering cousins did.

AFAIK, nobody's managed to domesticate either species. Some people have
tamed elephats, and probably zebras, but *domesticated* them? Wake up.


--
BMW K1100LT Ducati 750SS Yamaha XT600E Honda CB400F & SH50
chateau dot murray at idnet dot com
"What you're proposing to do will involve a lot of time
and hassle for no tangible benefit."

Michelle Steiner added these comments in the current discussion
du jour ...

In article ,
wrote:

Wow...Us whites are already a minority.

Actually, we are a super majority; 66% of the population.


I was referring to world population... Us is us, not U.S.

In that case, we have never been a majority.

Frankly, I can see no use whatsoever arguing over who is a majority
or one of a bazillion minorities. Which is why I dispise the idea
of dash-Americans. In my book, black, white, yellow, red, purple,
green, all colors, all races, all religions, all nationalities
who've earned the right to be called American citizens are
Americans. Period.

--
HP, aka Jerry

NOT Marxism "To each according to his needs, from each according to
his abilities" - Karl Marx from "The Communist Manifesto"
NOT Hate such as "No, no, no, not God Bless American, God DAMN
America" - Rev. Jeremy Wright
NOT hate such as Black Libaration Theology as easpoused by James
Cone

But -- No Way, No How, No Marxism, NObama!

Outback Jon added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ...

Ray Fischer wrote:
Then you hardly have any justification for citing the Bible
as a source for any law.


Do you work at being this dense? Or are you just delusional?

You stated that being put to death for adultery wasn't in the
Bible. I merely provided a cite of the facts that it *is* in
the Bible. I made no attempt to apply it to *anyone*. Or to
cite it as *law*.

My cite shows that being put to death for
adultery/homosexuality is in fact in the Bible. Nothing more,
nothing less. Every version of the Bible I've seen has the
book of Leviticus. Whether it applies to anyone specific, or
not, it's in there.

too bad that Biblical law isn't real law or we'd have less
adulterers and far less queers to **** up our country


--
HP, aka Jerry

NOT Marxism "To each according to his needs, from each according to
his abilities" - Karl Marx from "The Communist Manifesto"
NOT Hate such as "No, no, no, not God Bless American, God DAMN
America" - Rev. Jeremy Wright
NOT hate such as Black Libaration Theology as easpoused by James
Cone

But -- No Way, No How, No Marxism, NObama!

too bad that Biblical law isn't real law or we'd have less
adulterers and far less queers to **** up our country


And there it is folks, the same 'logic' that the Islamic extemists use
for Sharia law.


How does what goes on in peoples private lives '**** up' your country?

BrianNZ added these comments in the current discussion du jour
....
too bad that Biblical law isn't real law or we'd have less
adulterers and far less queers to **** up our country

And there it is folks, the same 'logic' that the Islamic
extemists use for Sharia law.


How does what goes on in peoples private lives '**** up' your
country?

If the Islamic terrorists come here, perhaps they'll see some of
their own style justice.

To your question, what queers and adulters do isn't in their
private lives, it is in their PUBLIC lives because they have the
unmitigated gall to demand rights and tax advantages equal to
those of the Bible's definition of marriage - that of a union of
one man and one woman. I don't like paying for queers that steal
my tax dollars and I feel that it is immoral for them to attempt
to skirt the law and raise children.

Now, exactly is it that queers, either bull dykes or butt ****ing
men, conceive children? Oh, yes, by "a union of one man and one
woman". And, tell me how a child growing up without a father and
a mother but watching/listening to two queers getting it on isn't
going to grow up majorly ****ed up? And, if said ****ed up child
needs help, who does he/she go to? Yes, the government, which is
funded by MY money and that of all tax payers who would just as
soon see it spend on applications that meet God's law.

I leave it to you to figure out how adulterers **** up
everybody's life, but as a hint, how about former President
William Jefferson Clinton getting a BJ under his desk in the Oval
Office? Is this the kind of morality you want YOUR children to
see?

Now, take your abomination ideas and, well, blow 'em out your
ass.

--
HP, aka Jerry

NOT Marxism "To each according to his needs, from each according
to his abilities" - Karl Marx from "The Communist Manifesto"
NOT Hate such as "No, no, no, not God Bless American, God DAMN
America" - Rev. Jeremy Wright
NOT hate such as Black Libaration Theology as easpoused by James
Cone

But -- No Way, No How, No Marxism, NObama!

And there it is folks, the same 'logic' that the Islamic
extemists use for Sharia law.


How does what goes on in peoples private lives '**** up' your
country?



If the Islamic terrorists come here, perhaps they'll see some of
their own style justice.

........
If you were to sit down with them and their holy book, you would
probably be surprised how much you have in common! They carry the same
hatred of adulterers and homosexuals as you do.....

.........


To your question, what queers and adulters do isn't in their
private lives, it is in their PUBLIC lives because they have the
unmitigated gall to demand rights and tax advantages equal to
those of the Bible's definition of marriage - that of a union of
one man and one woman. I don't like paying for queers that steal
my tax dollars and I feel that it is immoral for them to attempt
to skirt the law and raise children.

Now, exactly is it that queers, either bull dykes or butt ****ing
men, conceive children? Oh, yes, by "a union of one man and one
woman". And, tell me how a child growing up without a father and
a mother but watching/listening to two queers getting it on isn't
going to grow up majorly ****ed up? And, if said ****ed up child
needs help, who does he/she go to? Yes, the government, which is
funded by MY money and that of all tax payers who would just as
soon see it spend on applications that meet God's law.

I leave it to you to figure out how adulterers **** up
everybody's life, but as a hint, how about former President
William Jefferson Clinton getting a BJ under his desk in the Oval
Office? Is this the kind of morality you want YOUR children to
see?

Now, take your abomination ideas and, well, blow 'em out your
ass.
..............

There you go, getting all anal on me! Now which 'abomination ideas'
should be blown out my ass? Does you bible mention tax advantages?

A lot of 'IF's in there, but if a homosexual couple bring a kid up, as
long as they look after it, whats your problem?....they might hear
people 'getting it on'? hetrosexuals 'get it on' as well you know. I'd
say the majority of parents don't let their kids watch/listen to what
goes on in the bedroom.

As for Clintons BJ, no big deal, the moral of that particular story was
'tell the truth' rather than 'don't enjoy BJ's'. Compare that BJ to the
Churches abuse of children over the centuries....does that help put it
in perspective for you, or is it OK for priests to play with kids
because they read the bible?

On Nov 3, 9:04�am, Jerry Kindall wrote:

But to me, calling something "a Sabbath" when it lacks an essential
Sabbath practice -- complete abstinence from labor -- observed for
thousands of years longer than Christianity has even existed by the
people who invented the very idea -- well, that looks a whole lot like
missing the point. �I don't see how one can take away the very core of
something yet continue to call it by the same name.

The original Hebrews came out of northern Africa 3500~4000 years ago,
and moved towards the Fertile Crescent. They picked up a lot of their
mythology along the way, especially in Babylon.

The Hebrews were a band of pariahs. As outcasts, they lived on the
outside of the villages and made their living by selling charms and
telling stories and swindling the villagers out of their valuables,
and perhaps taking some livestock with them when they moved on.

They were basically a sinful bunch of thieves and con artists, but
they stuck together for thousands of years. They kept their tribe
together by bad-mouthing the
Gentile tribes they moved amongst.

They were unwelcome in the Gentile villages and they retaliated by
saying, "Those
Gentiles in that city are terrible people, they don't obey *our*
customs."

Back in the days when Moses was wandering in the Sinai desert with 12
tribes
of sinful Israelites, he saw that the nation was in danger of breaking
up and each
tribe going its separate way and the tribes being absorbed into other
tribes that
were pagan.

The Israelites had made a golden calf and were worshipping it. Where
did a rag tag bunch of former "slaves" get enough gold to make an
idol? They stole it on their way out of Egypt. They took everything
that was loose when they left.

So Moses claimed that an invisible "god" spoke to him and identified
itself as "the god of Abraham".

And this invisible "god" supposedly told Moses to "remember the
sabbath and keep it holy."

No work whatever was allowed to be performed, no travelling, and no
fire was to be kindled on the sabbath.

There is discussion in the Torah of a man who was caught gathering
firewood on the sabbath and Moses instructed the Israelites to take
the man into custody so he could be stoned to death.

Moses also told the Israelites that a person couldn't be punished for
a trangression if there was only one witness, it took two witnesses to
testify that the Law of Moses had been violated.

And, if the Israelites were really confused about whether a law had
been violated they were supposed to go talk to a Levite priest.

And so the legal profession was born. And the Israelites argued about
how they should obey the stringent and inconvenient laws of Moses and
about who was a hypocrite and who was a "good" Jew for obeying all the
laws.

There were several factions of Jews in the "Holy Land" around the time
of Christ.

One bunch was the Sadducees, descended from Zadok, head priest in the
temple of Solomon and another bunch were the Pharisees, who believed
that they could eat a hot meal on the sabbath (if it had been prepared
the day before and kept warm), while the Sadducees were sitting in
their cold houses eating cold food.

The Samaritans were another bunch of Jews, but they believed that
Moses had gone up on Mt. Tabor and received the commandments there, so
the Samaritans were hated by the other Jewish factions for being
heretics.

Then there was the problem with the Jews not accepting J. Christ as
the promised "messiah" that was supposed to rescue the Jews from the
Romans and
announce his reign in the "kingdom of heaven" which was going to be
right there in Jerusalem, not up in the sky somewhere.

Saul was raised as a law-abiding Pharisee himself, he renamed himself
"Paul", and, in his writings he called the Jews a bunch of hypocrites
and adulterers and fornicators.

And all of his railings against his own people were taken wrongly a
thousand years later, when the pope in Rome concluded that the Jews
must have been some terrible people and the persecutions of Jews
increased in Europe.

Meanwhile, back amongst the Jews who remained in the Middle East,
there was serious discussion going on about those very incovenient
laws that Moses that saddled them with.

Learned rabbis discussed ways to get around the commandments about
building a fire on the sabbath and how to have a hot meal and how to
move about the city they lived in without breaking a commandment.

Modern Jews know how to use a crock pot to make a sabbath stew, and
how to cover the burners of their stove with a "blech" (aluminum
sheet) and cover the knobs with aluminum foil.

And there are "eruvim" in most cities that allow Jews to move around
their neighborhood, which is marked with rods and wires, instead of
staying in the courtyards of the neighborhood's contiguous Jewish-
owned properties.

And, of late, more liberal rabbis have been saying that homosexuality
isn't such a bad violation of the Law of Mose that the perpetrators
should be stoned.

But there are still Jews that are so "orthodox" they would prefer to
freeze to death, rather than light a fire on the sabbath.

I once read a Chaim Potok novel in which he described a Jewish
chaplain in Korea during the 1950's who failed to provide the stove in
his tent with enough fuel to burn from Friday sunset to Saturday
sunset.

The fire went out, and the Jew decided that he would risk freezing to
death, rather than rekindle the fire and violate the law of Moses. He
was trapped in his tent by
snowdrifts, and he also couldn't dig his way out, for the same
wrongheaded religious belief system.

But, some Gentile soldiers shoveled the snow away from his doorway and
re-lit his stove...

On Nov 3, 12:21 pm, "HEMI-Powered" wrote:

Frankly, I can see no use whatsoever arguing over who is a majority
or one of a bazillion minorities. Which is why I dispise the idea
of dash-Americans.

President Theodore Roosevelt despised the notion of "hyphenated
Americans", too. Roosevelt was concerned that immigrants were
remaining loyal to the "Old Country" that they had left, and that they
wouldn't be as loyal to the USA.

In particular, the USA needed immigrants to buy war bonds and support
the new American empire in its foreign wars.

Roosevelt didn't want German-Americans to be loyal to the kaiser,
Chinese-Americans to be loyal to "the celestial emperor", or
Englishmen to remain loyal to the king of England.

If you should ever visit Ellis Island, go through the museum and you
will see
political cartoons that depict foreigners and immigrants in
stereotypical charicatures that would never be allowed in mainstream
media today.

But, Roosevelt was in the process of building an American empire, and
needed
as many supporters as he could get to finance our imperial wars...

Most Americans have never heard of the Phillipine Insurrection, in
which America
spent half a billion dollars "pacifying" the islands and killing a
million Funny Little Island People who didn't want the US government
there...

In my book, black, white, yellow, red, purple, green, all colors, all races,
all religions, all nationalities who've earned the right to be called
American citizens are Americans. Period.

Problem is, how does an immigrant "earn" this right to be naturalized
and be considered as American as me? I'm an 11th generation American,
and my ancestors financed the colonization of New England and they
came here with a royal charter from King Charles to establish three
different colonies, two in Massachusetts, and one in Rhode Island.

Am I supposed to accept a refugee from Blangadesh as a fellow
American, merely because he anwered some simple questions about the
American political system and swore an oath that he didn't understand?

Mohammed was a bus driver that used to take his break at a snack bar
where a
bunch of bikers hung out.

Mohammed was studying for his citizenship test and he asked me, "What
means this?", and pointed to the phrase about denouncing loyalty to
any foreign prince, power, or potentate.

So I explained to Mohammed that he must give up his loyalty to
Bangladesh and its government. Mohammed nodded his head as if he
understood, but he went on to boast about how things were different in
his country.

Mohammed could not understand the oath that he took, yet he became a
naturalized citizen in spite of that failure.

So how can anybody claim that a bunch of immigrants gathereing in some
public place, holding up their right hand and swearing an oath they do
not understand have "earned" the right to be called "Americans"?

I am a Real American, and immigrants will *never* be Americans.

In *my* book.

On Nov 3, 12:32�pm, BrianNZ wrote:

How does what goes on in peoples private lives '**** up' your country?

New Zealand is so small, you have little concept of how many queers
and adulterers and illegal immigrants there are in America.

Isolated by thousands of miles of Pacific ocean and a strict
immigration
law, you are safe from invasion and experiencing the painful realities
of a
country in crisis.

HEMI-Powered wrote:


Here's the part of the Bible I believe it: adultery is punished by
death by stoning and queers are beaten in the streets. Have a
problem with that? Then take it up with God.

You should read it. Extramarital sex was okay for men. Men who cheated
with married women were guilty but got off with a wink and a nod.

If a husband suspected his wife but had no proof, there was a special
recipe for filth she would be required to drink. It would make anyone
sick. If it made her sick, she was strangled for adultery.

Stoning, the cruelest execution, was not required for adulterous wives.
The only ones required to be stoned were unmarried girls. For them,
adultery was not copulation but failing to scream loudly enough to
summon help. When the scribes said they had no choice but to stone the
woman caught in adultery, they must have been talking about a teen seen
talking to her sweetheart against her father's wishes.

Jesus had a problem with that.

"HEMI-Powered" wrote in message
...
I leave it to you to figure out how adulterers **** up
everybody's life, but as a hint, how about former President
William Jefferson Clinton getting a BJ under his desk in the Oval
Office? Is this the kind of morality you want YOUR children to
see?

As opposed to, say, lying to the American people to
get support for a war?

Hell, yes.

Bob M.

.. wrote:
On Nov 3, 12:32�pm, BrianNZ wrote:

How does what goes on in peoples private lives '**** up' your country?

New Zealand is so small, you have little concept of how many queers
and adulterers and illegal immigrants there are in America.


So how many are there? Do you have a census where people can tick the
homosexual or adulterer boxes?

NZ is a bit bigger than Colorado, with a smaller population (by less
than 500,000). What sort of percentages do you reckon are gay and/or
adulterers?





Isolated by thousands of miles of Pacific ocean and a strict
immigration
law, you are safe from invasion and experiencing the painful realities
of a
country in crisis.



The crisis is all of your own doing, no sympathies from here. You have
immigration laws but you are not enforcing them.

Michelle Steiner wrote:
In article ,
Michelle Steiner wrote:

In article , BrianNZ
wrote:

To your question, what queers and adulters do isn't in their
private lives, it is in their PUBLIC lives because they have the
unmitigated gall to demand rights and tax advantages equal to those
of the Bible's definition of marriage - that of a union of one man
and one woman.
We queers have the unmitigated gall to demand the rights and tax
advantages that everyone else has under the constitution and laws of
our country. I expect that the same goes for the queers in your
country.

Brian, please learn how to quote properly; it wasn't until I read other
messages in the thread that I realized you were quoting someone else.



My apologies...whenever I hit 'reply to newsgroup', when it comes to
HEMI-powered there is a pop up that requests I send my reply to the
sender, so I just copied/pasted his post to reply to the newsgroup.

Sorry for the confusion but your reply was spot-on for
HEMI-powered.....well said.

I'll pick my act up.

On Nov 3, 11:30 am, Twibil wrote:
On Nov 3, 10:42 am, "Vito" wrote:

Why didn't Africans domesticate Zebra or Elephants? Because there was no need, no
survival advantage. But their wandering cousins did.

Oh dear. A racist who claims to know all about the small differences
between human types but who doesn't even know the difference between
horses and zebras or African and Indian elephants.

(Clue: Nobody of any race has ever successfully domesticated either
zebras *or* African elephants in any great numbers. This is because
both species tend to kill the people who try.)

Ever read "Guns, Germs and Steel" ?

Very enjoyable book that looks at some of this stuff.

"." wrote:
I am a Real American, and immigrants will *never* be Americans.

Sorry, I didn't realize that you are a pure-blooded red indian.

jue

On Nov 3, 4:08�pm, J�rgen Exner wrote:
"." wrote:
I am a Real American, and immigrants will *never* be Americans.

Sorry, I didn't realize that you are a pure-blooded red indian.

Don't be such an idiot. The "red indians", as you call them, never
wanted to be Americans until it became obvious that the only way to
beat us was to
join us and call themselves "Americans".

That was from around 1942 up to the present day. Indians went into
the
military because it was a hell of a lot better than sitting around on
the reservation wishing they could get drunk.

Of late, they are doing well, but it still doesn't make them
Americans, and they are as "racist" as any other alien group, they
don't accept people who aren't related to them by blood, because they
don't want to share the wealth with them.

I was riding out towards Yosemite National Park last week, and halfway
there, way out in the boonies, I saw a skyscraper sitting on top of a
hill, and I wondered, "What the **** is that building doing way out
here?"

Then I saw the sign that said it was an Indian casino. Those losers
hooked up with Mafia money and built themselves a casino on their
pitiful reservation
so they could cheat hard working Real Americans out of their
paychecks!

There's another Indian casino about 20 miles from where I live, and
another Indian casino about 70 miles away.

In fact, there are Indian casinos all over California, even on the
smallest reservation, in Santa Ynez, which is only about 40 acres.

But they reject anybody who claims to be an "Indian" of *their*
specific tribe, because they'd have to share the casino money with
them.

I had an Italian guy from New Jersey tell me that he wanted to live on
the local reservation with his Mexican/Indian wife, but the tribe
wouldn't let either of them stay there, they were not the right kind
of "Indians" to suit the locals.