Results 1 to 25 of 37

Thread: What is your understanding of...

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Columcille
    Guest

    Default

    Asdf, your fellow ****sexual lobbyists are doing their *** for you. You should not be concerned with the far right or the moderate. I always thought that there will be a great falling away, even if it be gradually. You will get your way. I bet the antiChrist himself will approve of ****sexuality in churches.

    You have eight bullets.
    1-4, 6. Total agreement. The ****sexual should not have these rights. If anything, (1) you should encourage a medical living will. (2) Law needs to be changed here, I would recommend giving people an alloted frequency in which this could be used, and open a door for an individual to appeal for more time depending on circumstances. I would just word it so it includes people living under the same household, which would include dying friends, neighbors, as well as the precious ****sexual who now reside under your roof. (3) resounding NO! this infringes on State rights. (4) I am absolutely against ****sexuals adopting children. (6) Social Security was suppose to be temporary when it was first done. If anything, they need to privatize this because in all the government's wisdom, it cannot get any worse than if we ditch the whole thing and force people to make ammends with family and start relying on what our forefathers had before Social Security came along. Also, the military is staunchly conservative and always makes every effort to segregate male and female. There is no coop living condition, and frankly with public showers in boot camp... it is no place for ****sexuals. Therefore, if they get veteran benefits, it will be based on the conditions set forth when they joined and started collecting. Meaning, tough luck, you knew when you were closeted ****sexual that you would not be able to share these benefits with a ****sexual partner.
    5. they should have this right.
    (5) This is a matter of fairness for any venture, whether it be domestic or not. Even in marriages, I see at times where there is considerable abuse of this type of law. I had a friend come home from Iraq and got divorced by his cheating wife--who incidently spend all the money and maxed out his credit with the general power of attorney given to her.
    7. Get a will.
    8. Encourage the free market, if a person wants to spend their hard earned money on insurance for someone else, they should get it. However, I wonder what the insurance companies know about the frequency of AIDS and its costability in the ****sexual circles. Might be too risky to sustain profitability. The free market should be the answer to this and not the government.

  2. #2
    Columcille
    Guest

    Default

    Ps. As far as the other concerns. I think I have answered that in regards to priority. Abortion accounts for more lives taken than what has been sustained by the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan combined for any given year. The life of the unborn is clearly innocent, whereas it is harder to make a case in regards to an "unjust war." As a soldier that has been over in Iraq twice, possibly looking at a third time... the UCMJ is pretty harsh, and we are drilled in our briefings and training the rules of war, current TTPs in regards to Escalation Of Force, and Rules Of Engagement. Our enemies do not abide by such rules, that is one reason we are gaining success in Iraq. Al-Queda uses torture, threats, and even ***asination of the people and their family members of whom they supposedly are helping against the wicked United States. I am against torture, and the uncomfort that some terrorists may feel in our care is better than handing them over to the Iraqi forces, who are not under the Genevia Convention, I might add, and will kill them. Better a living terrorist in our care whom may feel uncomfort than a dead one or one that will suffer real torture. A lot of these issues are real concerns, of which we should attempt to put a stop to, but it is still a matter of prioritizing them... and even if they are minor priority, it is easier to have discussion and change within whatever party is in power.


    However, if you want to discuss this further... it has moved away from the story of Sodom... I think you should start a new thread.

  3. #3
    Follower
    Guest

    Default

    The Letter of Jude, alone in all of the Bible, mentions any sexual sin, specifically, when referring to Sodom, (besides Genesis, of course) but he only speaks of their “going after strange flesh… [to]revile Angelic Majesties.” (verses 7 & 8) -- Not Human Men.

    Nowhere in all of scripture (NOWHERE!) is “****sexuality” said to be the cause of their doom. The SIN/GUILT of Sodom is NOT ****sexuality. The city's Sin is recorded (as posted by others above, quoting Ezekiel, and by extension Jesus in Matthew) and we err if we presume to know God’s revelation about something which He has NOT revealed.

  4. #4
    Jean Chauvin
    Guest

    Default Answer

    Genesis 19:24 is called a theophany. Meaning, the 2nd person of the Trinity blew up the city.

    God the Father (Yahveh is used here) from above sent down fire to God the son from earth, and God the Son then threw it to the direction of this city and we had a bombing.

    So, when somebody asks you, "what would Jesus bomb," that's you answer. Genesis 19:24.

    It was bombed as an example of God's judgment. Though, other cities were also done away with for various reasons.

    Respectfully,

    Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •