Moral of the story "evil has its uses." I don't disagree with that
Moral of the story "evil has its uses." I don't disagree with that
JB, I refer you to my earlier post on page 3 of this thread in which I linked to http://carm.org/should-homosexuals-be-put-to-death
"Not suffering witches to live" was a commandment directed to the Jews at a time long ago when there was a Theocratic Jewish government. Such commandments went away with the end of that phase of history.
No one thinks that the witch trials at Salem were right so please don't brand anyone as a witch burner. The bible does not need to rewritten or reinterpreted in light of "changing times." People just need a more thorough and circumspect understanding of it.
Since I'm a deist I don't attempt to explain anything in the bible as I view it as a book of compiled stories and myths that make a point about human behaviors. My view of "God" is that of a force (kharma) instead of a spiritual being. None of the behaviors exhibited by mankind is necessary for God to have initiated and serves no purpose of benefit to himself if he is a spiritual being. God doesn't need man. I view religion and the "holy books" as nothing more than an attempt by early men to explain causes and effects that they observed in the natural world surrounding them because of the lack of scientific understanding. As we learn more through science the truths of the natural world will come about and the myths and demand for "faith" will diminish. Ganted it won't happen in my lifetime so in the meantime I get to listen to the stories of religious folk which I find amusing.
OSA's resident crotchety bastege checking in-
I'm assuming that this actually happened and if so, I'm not surprised. Our current presidential place-holder is so infatuated with the topic that I wonder if he should just come out himself.
As for me, I really don't care one way or the other but I think making a big news story out of this "huge" announcement just demonstrates the worthlessness of the American media.
Ha ha! My sarcasm meter was pegged while reading the post. But, I have double the age and then some.
This would be a great time to thank the veterans of foreign wars on the forum and off for fighting for our country, not only protecting us from harm but protecting our rights as well as our freedoms. IMO, rights and freedoms go hand in hand. We want our 2nd Amendment rights, and we're going to fight to the death to keep them. Well then the people who want their freedoms should have their freedoms too, as long as they dont hurt themselves or other people, and they should be able to fight for their freedoms. I am 100% behind both- I want my 2nd Amendment rights same as I want the freedoms to do whatever I want as long as I dont harm myself or others.
Last edited:
We used to burn witches, and you know - we didn't have a witch problem for HUNDREDS of years! Now, we're all relaxed and non-judgemental, and we again get infested with witches. I always knew those folks in Salem did the right thing.
Agreed. The guy could have just kept it to himself, as what organs he prefers is his business, and doesn't concern me. Put me in the "IDGAF" camp.
Agree again, though as far as I'm concerned, marriage is a construct based on religion, therefore the government should have nothing to do with it or have any say-so in it. Of course, it was necessary for them to do so, as there are licenses to sell, etc. Money, money, money. Kill anything linking the .gov to marriage (tax issues, licensing, etc.), and leave matrimony to the churches. If you're atheist, then live together - whatever. No ceremony necessary. Draw up something and have a notary stamp it for all I care.
Yes, they do. But sometimes change isn't necessarily a good thing or a bad thing. Should we accept homosexuality? I guess; you can equate it with a birth defect, as if they are indeed born with that orientation then it is truly a birth defect, as sexual attraction to a mate that does not possess the biological equipment to reproduce isn't natural. Doesn't mean it's necessarily wrong - but it's certainly not biologically "normal". As with a person with Down's Syndrome, that particular condition isn't "normal", but it's acceptable, as it is a condition that exists due to no fault of the person afflicted. Incidentally, we don't have "Down's Syndrome Pride" parades, bumper stickers celebrating it, etc. Play the hand you're dealt without flaunting it and at least some of the hostility will die out.
Yes and no. Yes, we need to embrace what the founders gave us, but to posit that we "need to evolve" is dead wrong. Which way is the "conservative" party evolving? Hard left, and as such, they are now more "Democrat" than "Republican". And so long as the left continues to run hell bent to the hard left, the faux conservatives will keep chasing the dangling carrot to try and recruit members from a pool that will never vote Republican, to try and staunch the bleeding. True conservatism is dying, and we may as well go down with our principals than to become Marxists hiding under the banner of conservatism. After all, do we really succeed if the end result is becoming just what our opposition is, only under a different name? The winner of that contest is obvious. It's already too late.
This may last for another generation or three, but Nature has a way of refining what should be. There are groups (well-meaning, of course) that by their actions ensure their own destruction. The Gay Pride folks are taking advantage of that, and who can blame them? When Americans are afraid to speak their mind for fear of being called "intolerant, bigoted, racist, sexist, etc..etc..etc...we have lost the country to those that assign us those titles.
Humans have been around for thousands of years, and certain truths have become evident. Cultures are built around those truths. Those that deny the truth will ultimately be corrected, and Nature will again put things right.
I'm guessing that by "three generations" the self destruction will be complete.
Similar threads
