cwsox

steff has a friend who will protect her....

and both were broadcast on ESPN - I heard it - Frank asks, Mr Eye declares, next after this commercial....

It was in all the papers - you don't remember saying that?????

I differ from you on the sanction of God for a death penalty practiced by humans in the Prime Covenant (Old Testament). I also differ that we of the Christian Covenent are free from the validity of the Prime Covenant texts. Everything Jesus said and taught and did and was operated out of the Prime Covenant. Paul makes the argument that we are free from the demands of the law but yet we operate with that being the normative guide for the faith and life of the Church. In law is also Gospel. We are obligated to keep the law but to let the law inform us under the Gospel. And as Paul points out in Romans, we as Christians are but a branch on the tree of faith - we are not the tree. And the branch doesn't make it without the tree. The John text does not make your piont for me. I think your stronger support would be in the Sermon on the Mount where Jesus in rabbinc fashin and also as prophet (and as we confess, God Incarnate) at once reaffirmed and reinterpreted the law in laws that made them even more binding and yet spoke against a legalistic intepretation. I do not think I am saying this well. As for Paul, I am a great fan of Paul, a few off the wall comments here and there notwithstanding. Other than those few places, I think the great impact of his theology is very liberating. Yet others I know and respect also share your opinion on Paul.

????????? I cannot think of any Scriptural occurance where the God of Abramam (and Isaac and Jacob and Moses) suggested let alone encouraged human beings conducting an actual capital punishment. The few instances that are recorded, such as the killing of Absalom, were greatly lamented in fact and were without God's sanction. Others who did acts that would seemingly call for capital punishment, such as commiting murder, what did God do? With David (killing of Uriah) God acted and there was no capital punishment. With Cain, God banished Cain but marked him so that no one would execute capital punishment on him. The rhetorical langauge in parts of the levitical code are there but no circumstances in the Scriptural accounts of those being acted upon and they served as ritual language as opposed to legal code. God may have acted here or there but not humans with God's blessing and indeed that is the point: vengence is God's, not ours.

Sorry Joihn Henry wants a cap? For his father's head? but then again, I bet Ted's head is cold and a cap would help...

despite what I said earlier I will state this - I am a long time member of several religious coalitions and organizations comprised of churches and church bodies and church commissions as well as Jewish religious organizations and clergy and laity both Christian and Jewish who fight for choice. IlliniBob and others, I have no doubt of your passion. Please do not doubt the passion on the other side nor the deep religious and faith convictions of those who fight for choice. I have been physically attacked by anti choice people many times and I have stood vigil at clinics after bomb threats were made and in several cases after clinics were bombed. Every year it is a ritual in my community on the anniversary of Roe v Wade for someone to take verbal shots at me in the local paper for my pro chocie stance, usually with the worst name calling and denouncing me to hell, etc. In prior threads I have said all I need to see about what I feel is the utter hypocrasy of the so called pro life movement. Someone can search that if they wish to. I have also worked as an employee in the foster care department of Catholic Family Services. I did take the pro choice bumper sticker off the car while I worked there, that was only right, but my pro choice position was never a secret. And yet they loved me there because there was a dialogueof mutual respect. With those people, they knew that my commitment to life was very real and for me, so was theirs. We differed greatly at the question of when life began as opposed to potential life. But the people I worked with were actually doing something. Abortion is not about "mistakes" and convenience and it angers me when that is said. Unless one has worked in the juvenile court world one may not be aware of the great numbers of rapes and incest that occur. And perhaps unless one is a pastor or a doctor one may not know the real life situations that happen, especially with medical issues, that make the cheap shot comments on "mistakes" and "convenience" a matter for which I do get angered. And yet again I very easily worked with people on the other side of the fence - good Catholics paid my salary - because when the rhetotic is stripped away and one says, ok, here is real life, not glib comments - when it gets real - then real conversation begins and there can be dialogue. When shoits get made on the Internet, I wonder if some fiolks think that clergy like me really get a kick out of killing babies. Do you really think that I would so something that I would consider killing a baby? Is there anything about me or anything I have ever posted that would say that I could countenance killing a baby? Mr Eye and Illini Bob and others, thius is an issue on which there is a great divide. Yes, IBob, if I thought this emdical procedure of abortion was murder, I would have your passion. But I have my passion that every living human being must be able to make medical decisions for their own self between their conscience and their God and that the state should not be playing any role in pushing a particular religious belief held by some to deny others medical procedures that involve the health and life of a woman. Abortion is a medical procedure that sometimes is the best of a series of not so good alternatives. It is not about convenience. It is not about mistakes. That is an insult to women who are in situations which no man will ever face. Abortion is always a serious matter - it involves potential life - and again a sperm is a sperm and an egg is an egg and an embryo is an embryo and a fetus is a fetus and not until the point of vialbility do we have life, but rather only the potential for life. Glib comments otherwise, to not doubt the morality and the deep abiding faith in God that deeply takes into account the Scriptures and Christian teachings (which are not always what some think...) in coming to the fervent belief in the Name of God that choice must be preserved. My question is, can that, will that be respected? If this forum is going to degrade itself into charges of baby killers and all the cliches being tossed, then nothing good has happened. Some verbal bombs have ben tossed my way. I may have tossed a few back because folks on my side get tired of being ripped into. As baggio posted, between him and me, we just simply must agree to disagree and move onto something else. Bags and I could go back and forth forever but it solves nothing so we go on as friends and set some things aside. I hope we do that with all of us.

At Dawn We Slept at amazon

Gordon Prange's book At Dawn We Slept to me that is the definitive book it concludes that American intelligence knew a Japanese attack was coming and in fact the bases closest to Japan were ready but no one - not even the Japanese Navy - thought they could actually launch an attack on Pearl Harbor because of the great distance and logistics - the Japanese Navy took a huge risk that most didn't think they could remotely pull off and that is why Pearl was surprised I may have the author's name slightly spelled wrong - a few years I did a booked for lunch thing with a bunch of WW2 veterans at the local library and when we got out the maps and looked at the logistics, they convinced me that Prange was right on as for the parallels with 911, remember that the callousness to American death that you find appalling when suggested to G W is just as appalling when applied to FDR and from what I have been able to gather, the same conclusion Prange reached on Pearl will be minimum same as on GW and 911

Bartman and Israel4Ever are the same person as shown by the IP addresses which also reveal where they work - whether this was reported on ESPN 1000 I do not know because I am in Michigan - but by the same token Bartmnan and I4E are in Virginia where there is less chance of them hearing it than me funny how they only post at the same time - so whatever game is being played - there is something not right here

and how did the two of you hear this on ESPN 1000 when the two of you (who are the same person) work in Fairfax, Virginia?

I am usually at USCF on saturdays and sundays - let me know when I might buy you a beer at game as long as the beer is Blue Moon...

one point because I like you as a person and will not brawl with you - FDR asked for and the US Congress passed the declaration of war against Germany AFTER Germany declared war on the US. It is in all the history books! (speaking of accused by many of having advanced knowledge of an attack.. Gee Who could that be? BUlls*** to not know...)

I am saying that one of them very specifically said that they have told of a smoking gun by several deep throats, and that some of the deep throats have testified and some not testified yet but that it will all come out. One of their very interesting other points was why were we told repatedly that everything was done with box cutters when the stewardess' telephone call that was released indicated mace - they said a lot of key parts of that call were not released - and that the one that they continue to be refused is the logs of the president's briefings in August 2001... and before it gets asked, all of them tonight on NPR had voted for G W in 2000 and were Republicans

I am sitting at the office listening to NPR, to four widows of victims of the terrorist attack on the WTC. The things they are saying are incredible. And even more so is that some people ahve called in to rip into these women for asking questions, ripping these women for wanting the inquiry to what happened that day have the limitations taken off. They indicate there is a "smoking gun" out there that is being hidden thus far. They have been informed of this in pursuit of their own search foir answers. 911 family link

what Karl Rove and the Republicans did to Max Cleland in the 2002 election was utterly reprehensible. Senator Cleland was seeking to have the employers of the then-proposed TSA covwered by collective bargaining and the same union rights as all other federal employees, opposed by Bush. For that, Rove and the Republicans ran ads with Cleland's and Osama bin laden's pictures together and said that Cleland was supporting terrorism. Senator Cleland was defeated after leading by a decent margin prior to those ads being run.

me too

for the record, the language of "killing babies" is very wrong and inflammatory an embryo is an embryo and a fetus is a fetus and neither one is a baby (now the real baby killer could be considered to be G W Bush who ordered a war based on lies about immient threats and babies as well as children and pregnant women were indeed among the collateral damage in Iraq) abortion is a very serious medical procedure and the overheated rhetoricof baby killing does not help solve any problem and having said that Steff gives wise advice and on this subject I shall say no more because the passions do run so deep that it will just cause immense anger

does baseball have any revenue sharing? I am just asking because I am not positive of the answer. But I vastly prefer revenue sharing to salary cap.

two sons!!!! what is the probability that two brothers will fight over something they both want? what is the probability that two brothers will agree on everything?

Rex, I am not so sure we differ that much if at all. 50s baseball economics were different but then again one team won 8 of 10 pennents anyway. Baseball survived. What will bring reality back to the game is sheer economics. No team can spend those sums forever. Look how Arizona had to cut back its spending. Boston has a limited seating capacity and even for the Yankees there is only so much revenue that can obtained. Steinbrenner is no spring chicken either. One day in the probably near future he'll die or become incompetent and the Yankees will have new owners who won't have such deep pockets - I have no idea what his will is like or his family, but if he has a couple kids and each gets a share, they may be doing more infighting than anything else in the near forseeable future. Reality will set it. No business can run those deficits for any length of time. Steinbrenner may be spending precisely because he knows his time is limited due to actuarial tables. Not even he can spend at this rate for a sustained period over years. And the other reality - Jeter vs ARod. That team could be torn apart by dissension about who plays SS and be lucky to win 80 with its pitching. Who knows. Injuries: see Aaron Boone. As someone else very wisely said, we only play them 6 times, they will not effect our divsion race and if we get to the playoffs in a shoirt series, who knows. No team is unbeatable. On paper yes. In real life - very different. and the real fools here: Boston. Whatever they did to not let it work by the numbers, the Yankees did do and gotta give the Yankees credit for that and it is the Red Sox fans who should eb screaming. And of course Texas finished last with ARoad and Seattle won 120 without him.

I will and I do.

now that is an interesting phrase it was just a idle comment by me in a very stressful day at the office - Rex and Steff, don't take me so literally - just a random idle comment

I do not want a salary cap under any circumstances. I am not thrilled with what the yankees can do but it is not ruining baseball. The same complaint has been lodged against them for 100 years. Back in 1905 people were complaining about the high salaries in baseball and some teams having better resources than others. What is the real problem is they are spending more than anyone else - but what will ahppen? Will they win 125 games like Seattle a few years agao and then get swept out of the 1st round of the playoffs? Are they immune to injury or player discontent? Chicago fans had their version of this, when a team with Jordan and Pippin signed Rodman. No one in Chicago complained a team was signing "everyone" then. The games are played on the field and even if the Yankees go off a winning streak like in the 1950s when they won every year but two, baseball will survive. Over reaction and trying to fix things that are not broken where the repair is worse than the problem is not the solution. Maybe the real solution is to rent the DVD of Damn Yankees and realize this is no new thing and baseball has survived and the world has continued to spin around the sun as required.

I don't know how to break this to people -- there is a God but God does not get involved with baseball, or with any sports sorry ---- all those people praying to win or for another team to lose or thanking God because they think God helped them win a game - wasting their time