Anything Forums

Posted: **Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:14 pm**

Red Squirrel wrote: American geographic knowledge never ceases to amuse me. I don't even think they have internet in the tundra. LOL. Temps there are about the same as winter here, but the problem is there's hardly any snow which probably explains the permafrost. The ground is frozen all year round instead of about half the year so it makes the possibility of any infrastructure very hard to impliment, but I suppose it's possible with proper equipment and at some point part of the ground slightly defrosts.

Red, I call the northern part of Minnesota a "tundra." It's a slightly sarcastic way of calling it cold as a witches... feet. Anyway, I do know what a tundra is, but I wasn't using the word in a literal sense. However, it has become strickingly apparent in these last few weeks that you have a very hard time distinguishing between figuritive and non-figuritive language.

Red Squirrel wrote: And if you want to call Biblical belief crap, well that's gona catch up some day, hopefully you will realize you're going in the wrong direction before the time comes. The path that leads to destruction is broad and easy to find but the path that leads to life is narrow and few find it.... I'm glad I did.

Thanks Red, I'll let my Young Life leaders from high school know you're carrying on their work.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:17946

Posted: **Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:15 pm**

Red Squirrel wrote: And if you want to call Biblical belief crap, well that's gona catch up some day, hopefully you will realize you're going in the wrong direction before the time comes. The path that leads to destruction is broad and easy to find but the path that leads to life is narrow and few find it.... I'm glad I did.

Red, the stuff coming out of your head isn't biblical belief, it's just ignorance. Look at Bookworm; he's looking at both sides and assimulating the arguement that we're presenting. It doesn't matter whether he agrees or not, but the mere fact that he understands the arguement and presents a LOGICAL response means a lot.

But with you, it doesn't matter what we say; the mere fact that we disagree with you and want some more substantial evidence that Gayness is bad for society instantly means that we are atheists. You don't need to read or dispute what we say, you just keep hiding behind the bible and preaching that unless we repent our "gay-loving ways" we're going to hell.

He wasn't calling your belief in the bible crap, just your ignorance.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:17947

Posted: **Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:25 pm**

Actually, I was calling stuff like this...

Abortion, homosexuality damage our way of life

December 1, 2004

We are quickly changing the makeup of our country. We are killing thousands of our most vulnerable each year in abortion clinics.

These have the potential of being doctors, engineers and scientists. They would be taxpayers helping to pay Social Security for retirees, health programs and the various institutions we need.

Marriage is being exchanged for cohabitation. Those who do marry have only one or two children. Homosexuality leads to fewer heterosexual partners who would marry and have children.

With 40,000 killed yearly on our roads, other accidents, violence and wars, we are shrinking. So we must allow people from other countries to come. Many of those who come want to keep their own culture that often doesn't promote our way of life, our values and beliefs.

Americans need to be aware of what is happening to our country in ways that are not obvious.

-- Clarence Haverland, Turner

along with the fact that Red thinks it's logically sound to offer it as justification for his argument, CRAP . Oh and the fact that just about everything he listed in his response did, in fact, somehow directly relate to God, religion, or the Bible. Which is exactly what we had politely asked him not to do. What a bunch of crap.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:17948

Posted: **Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:27 pm**

shenbaw wrote:
Red Squirrel wrote: American geographic knowledge never ceases to amuse me. I don't even think they have internet in the tundra. LOL. Temps there are about the same as winter here, but the problem is there's hardly any snow which probably explains the permafrost. The ground is frozen all year round instead of about half the year so it makes the possibility of any infrastructure very hard to impliment, but I suppose it's possible with proper equipment and at some point part of the ground slightly defrosts.
Red, I call the northern part of Minnesota a "tundra." It's a slightly sarcastic way of calling it cold as a witches... feet. Anyway, I do know what a tundra is, but I wasn't using the word in a literal sense. However, it has become strickingly apparent in these last few weeks that you have a very hard time distinguishing between figuritive and non-figuritive language.

Right, jeez..

I guess insecure people just need to tear people down. Though I'm sure he'd have no problem joking about Texas being a desert...

shenbaw wrote:
Red Squirrel wrote: And if you want to call Biblical belief crap, well that's gona catch up some day, hopefully you will realize you're going in the wrong direction before the time comes. The path that leads to destruction is broad and easy to find but the path that leads to life is narrow and few find it.... I'm glad I did.
Thanks Red, I'll let my Young Life leaders from high school know you're carrying on their work.

Haha! I'd forgotten about Young Life!

Yes, the wrong path is wide, it's called the mainstream; what everyone else does, even 'common sense' at times. Good luck finding the narrow road Red; education is the key, not over self-confidence and common sense.

sintekk wrote: He wasn't calling your belief in the bible crap, just your ignorance.

+1

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:17949

Posted: **Tue Dec 14, 2004 6:07 pm**

on a completely unrelated note, am I the only person bothered by the word "gayness"? It sounds like it should be spelled gheyness, and spouted off by 12 year olds speaking of it like cooties from ghey n00b counterstrike players who just got pwned. Though I realize the word "homosexuality" is just too much to type for some people

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:17976

Posted: **Tue Dec 14, 2004 6:09 pm**

manadren wrote: on a completely unrelated note, am I the only person bothered by the word "gayness"? It sounds like it should be spelled gheyness, and spouted off by 12 year olds speaking of it like cooties from ghey n00b counterstrike players who just got pwned. Though I realize the word "homosexuality" is just too much to type for some people

Yes, homosexuality is tough to type in 1337

Who has time while playing a FPS to type out "h0m053xu4li7y" ?

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:17977

Posted: **Tue Dec 14, 2004 6:41 pm**

h0m053xu4li7y?

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:17986

Posted: **Tue Dec 14, 2004 8:01 pm**

OMG U h0m0 cheep @$s n00b!11!! WTF!!1!!

Funny how some use the word gay for stupid, I tend to do that myself somtimes... "you're gay" translates to "you're stupid" and not "you're homosexual"

Gay also means happy in french.. ."C'est noel nous sommes tous gay!"

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18013

Posted: **Tue Dec 14, 2004 8:07 pm**

Gay means happy in english too... it's just that many people would consider you 'gay' if you used the word gay to mean happy

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18015

Posted: **Tue Dec 14, 2004 8:10 pm**

Oh I thought it was only a french term. So if someone calls me gay in english I don't have to take it as an insult.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18017

Posted: **Tue Dec 14, 2004 8:13 pm**

Red Squirrel wrote: Oh I thought it was only a french term. So if someone calls me gay in english I don't have to take it as an insult.

Actually, you should take it as an insult; that's the most common usage of it on the interweb

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18018

Posted: **Tue Dec 14, 2004 10:28 pm**

I know some people who would get quite upset if they heard that.

(Hint: they are happy)

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18021

Posted: **Tue Dec 14, 2004 11:53 pm**

Well, I've been thinking about why gay marriage should not be legal, and I understand you want me to explain it without using God or the Bible. Here goes. Gay marriage should not be legal because it is not marriage. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Now I suppose you want me to explain marriage without using God or the Bible. I say, you people are never satisfied. Well, I'm not even going to try that one. For the majority of Americans, marriage is not just a civil union but it is also a religious rite. If marriage was just a social institution that has slowly evolved over time, then the terms and definition of marriage could change as well. But if marriage is an institution that was established by God, then God has the authority to establish the terms and definition. Here is a portion of the concluding paragraph of a magazine article I just finished reading. "God has a perspective on marriage that He clearly communicates in the Bible. Cultures may change, opinions may vary, but individuals who honestly research what God's Word teaches regarding marriage will come away with a clear understanding of God's ways. The real issue in today's culture does not center in understanding what God teaches about marriage. It centers in man's willingness to obey God's teachings." I understand that some people may not agree with my stand on the authority of the Bible. That's fine. But the fact that you disagree with me doesn't automatically mean that I am wrong. And asking me to explain my perspective on an issue without using God or the Bible is like me asking you to explain why stealing is wrong without using the words "infringe" and "individual" and "rights." From your perspective, you would need to use those words, and from my perspective, I would use the Bible.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18065

Posted: **Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:06 am**

Bookworm wrote: Well, I've been thinking about why gay marriage should not be legal, and I understand you want me to explain it without using God or the Bible. Here goes. Gay marriage should not be legal because it is not marriage. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Now I suppose you want me to explain marriage without using God or the Bible. I say, you people are never satisfied. Well, I'm not even going to try that one. For the majority of Americans, marriage is not just a civil union but it is also a religious rite. If marriage was just a social institution that has slowly evolved over time, then the terms and definition of marriage could change as well. But if marriage is an institution that was established by God, then God has the authority to establish the terms and definition. Here is a portion of the concluding paragraph of a magazine article I just finished reading. "God has a perspective on marriage that He clearly communicates in the Bible. Cultures may change, opinions may vary, but individuals who honestly research what God's Word teaches regarding marriage will come away with a clear understanding of God's ways. The real issue in today's culture does not center in understanding what God teaches about marriage. It centers in man's willingness to obey God's teachings." I understand that some people may not agree with my stand on the authority of the Bible. That's fine. But the fact that you disagree with me doesn't automatically mean that I am wrong. And asking me to explain my perspective on an issue without using God or the Bible is like me asking you to explain why stealing is wrong without using the words "infringe" and "individual" and "rights." From your perspective, you would need to use those words, and from my perspective, I would use the Bible.

I think that counts as answering the question without using god, at least until you brought god into it

I understand that marriage is a religious rite established in the Bible, and therefore subject to the definition of which held therein. But here's the but. It's not just a religious rite anymore, it's also a cultural institution and a government institution, as well as a religious rite of those who hold different beliefs. People who do not live by strict interpretations of the Bible get married, as well as people who aren't even Christians at all. So there has to be multiple definitions of the word marriage. There is nothing that says you have to give up your definition. their is nothing that says you have to marry a gay man or that you can't hold your marriage to mean more, to be more pure in god's eyes. This is about letting homosexuals do what they think is right, what they consider part of their religion and lifestyle. To allow them to practice their definition, and have their definition become compatible with the government's definition, so they can receive the same benefits that heterosexual partners do.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18072

Posted: **Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:44 am**

Bookworm wrote: snip!

Fair enough, and inspiring.
On the flip side: My personal feelings.
I believe everyone has the right to marriage, not just heterosexuals. Marriage has existed for a multitude of reasons, some just, some not. Across the span of time, marriage has shifted in it's purpose, and split and co-exist with it's other forms. But if you want me to get into what I believe, I believe a marriage must first be based on love before anything else can be considered. The basis for marriage is that 2 people want to spend the rest of their lives together, through love. As we well know, it often cannot stand on love alone, however, in order to bring a child into the world and form a subcatagory of marriage, a family, love must exist. To raise and nurture that child properly, love must exist and guide their hand. Not just a short term blind love that creates harmful situations and a destructive atmosphere, but an educated love for all people and of course each other. From the arts to buisness, love for all man must guide all areas if society is to advance, that's a personal philosophy of mine. Love is the basis for marriage, and should remain the basis, as long as religion remains a personal issue and not an issue of the government. Thank you. *steps down*

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18077

Posted: **Wed Dec 15, 2004 11:22 am**

Bookworm wrote: Well, I've been thinking about why gay marriage should not be legal, and I understand you want me to explain it without using God or the Bible. Here goes. Gay marriage should not be legal because it is not marriage. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Now I suppose you want me to explain marriage without using God or the Bible. I say, you people are never satisfied. Well, I'm not even going to try that one. For the majority of Americans, marriage is not just a civil union but it is also a religious rite. If marriage was just a social institution that has slowly evolved over time, then the terms and definition of marriage could change as well. But if marriage is an institution that was established by God, then God has the authority to establish the terms and definition. Here is a portion of the concluding paragraph of a magazine article I just finished reading. "God has a perspective on marriage that He clearly communicates in the Bible. Cultures may change, opinions may vary, but individuals who honestly research what God's Word teaches regarding marriage will come away with a clear understanding of God's ways. The real issue in today's culture does not center in understanding what God teaches about marriage. It centers in man's willingness to obey God's teachings." I understand that some people may not agree with my stand on the authority of the Bible. That's fine. But the fact that you disagree with me doesn't automatically mean that I am wrong. And asking me to explain my perspective on an issue without using God or the Bible is like me asking you to explain why stealing is wrong without using the words "infringe" and "individual" and "rights." From your perspective, you would need to use those words, and from my perspective, I would use the Bible.

First of all Bookworm, I appreciate your thoughtful effort.

Second, me using the words "infringe" and "individual" and "rights" is nothing like you using the words "God" or "the Bible" or "Sin." The reason I say this is because of the meanings behind those words. When I say "It infringes upon an individual's right to..." I am giving direct evidence of a "wrong" in that it causes harm or damage to another person or group of people by violating what we as a society have determined to be a basic set of undeniable human rights (i.e. life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, etc.). When you say "In the Bible God says it's a Sin to..." you are giving evidence of absolutely nothing except what it says in that book. It would be like me saying "Murder is wrong because it says it's illegal in our Minnesota Statutes and Codes." That fact has nothing to do with WHY it's wrong, it simply points out the fact THAT it's illegal. When you say, "Gay marriage is wrong because it says it's wrong in the Bible," you say nothing in respect to WHY it's wrong, you're simply pointing out THAT according to this book it's incorrect. One approach actually addresses the question of WHY, the other does not.
Finally, I think that article you read got you a little off topic of what exactly it is that we are talking about here.

Red wrote: Figured if they're legalizing pot and gays might as well keep this trend going!

Red wrote: Obviously smoking pot and being gay is worse, common. Obviously if you're hacking into the pentagon to launch missles it's a different story

Red wrote: Gaymess affects familes, so does pot.

Red wrote: And unless your entire family is gay, I'm sure if you turned gay or/and got addicted to drugs it would make a big impact on your family.

Red wrote: So legal or not hacking should not be something that affects anyone as much as drugs, gays, murder etc. Gays also tend to be sexual predators, though it's not always the case so I can't stereotype. Either way they're gross and I keep my distance.

I think "marriage" was just mentioned for the first time in this thread just now when you posted that argument to make it illegal. We aren't talking about gay marriage here, Bookworm. We're just talking about being gay and how it's much much worse than hacking into someone's personal computer. So again, as much as I do appreciate your honest and genuine attempt to justify outlawing gay marriage, perhaps you'd like to try again and address the real issue and not the one you happened to just finish reading an article about.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18100

Posted: **Wed Dec 15, 2004 1:34 pm**

note: I'm just gonna keep on agreeing. everything that needs to be adressed is being adressed.

I'd like to point to shenbaw's posts as examples of good reading and rebutal skills.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18105

Posted: **Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:31 pm**

I'd like to point to FloodG8 as a nice guy.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18112

Posted: **Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:39 pm**

Well, since we're patting everyone's back...
Cupcakes for everyone!

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18115

Posted: **Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:42 pm**

I'd like to point at sintekk for feeding the animals...

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18117

Posted: **Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:45 pm**

Damn you, you whistle-blowing octopus!

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18119

Posted: **Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:48 pm**

I'd like to point at sintekk's cupcakes as being very cute.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18120

Posted: **Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:49 pm**

shenbaw wrote: I'd like to point at sintekk's cupcakes as being very cute.

What can I say? I put my heart and soul into me cupcakes!

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18122

Posted: **Wed Dec 15, 2004 2:56 pm**

haha those are cute cupcakes!

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18125

Posted: **Wed Dec 15, 2004 3:44 pm**

cupcakes or death?

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1377, old post ID:18136

Anything Forums

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"

legalize "computer crime"