Wong & Owens

QUOTE(YASNY @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 12:27 PM) Did someone piss in your Cheerios this morning? In a manner of speaking, yes. I have a roof leak holding up my bathroom remodeling project, some roofers tell me the whole roof needs to be replaced, I've been living in the same house with a girl I'm no longer dating for over 2 months now, her best friend's husband dropped dead on Friday, and I'm sleeping with a 25 year old who keeps me out until 5:00 am, which my 30 year old body can't handle as well as it used to. Made my bed, lying in it, and having all sorts of nightmares

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Jan 5, 2006 -> 11:57 AM) Here's something interesting to toss around. If a gay couple adopts a baby boy. Will he grow up to be gay, because of the acceptance of it? Can two gay guys raise a heterosexual boy? See I think it has to do with genes. When that kid hits 11 or 12 he is gonna see some girl and be like whoa!! It doesn't matter that his dads are gay...I think his body will tell him what he likes to see and what he doesn't. edit: BTW, I was trying to take this away from a s*** starting thread, into a legitimate discussion. Here's a true story: A neighbor of mine from when I was growing up, Mom is the devoutest(is that a word?) catholic I have ever known, dad is also religious but not quite as fervent. They had 8 kids, one of which came out of the closet about 2 years ago. We grew up on the south side, and this guy now lives on the north side and won't ever show his face down south again, for obvious reasons. He tried dating girls for years, and it just didn't take, and he was never molested or raped in his life-- he had a pretty average south side catholic upbringing. Two points: 1) if you don't think homosexuality is genetically based/influenced/directly caused, you're ignorant and you only believe what you want to believe. 2) regardless of what "made" him gay, is the fact that he likes to suck dick(on his own time, in his own home, etc) worth treating him like s*** to the point that 1)His family has mainly disowned him, 2)he's afraid to appear in the neighborhood he grew up in for fear of ridicule or worse, 3)most of his childhood friends ditched him? If your answer is yes, then you suck and can go to hell.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jan 3, 2006 -> 02:08 PM) But faith kicks ass. Faith Kicksass? Is that a relative of yours? Thank you, I'm here all week at 7 and 10:30.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 3, 2006 -> 12:45 PM) I have always suspected that is true, now that I'm learning a little history, it has become clearer that you are correct. So now we have a whose sword is mightier situation that will probably last forever. What a joke. Does either side really think their god would condone all this bloodshed over a plot of land? Idiots, the lot of them. Cut out that section of land and put it on the f***ing moon. Let them fight over it up there.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jan 3, 2006 -> 10:33 AM) There's an interesting article in Slate today talking about the blogging outcry of a Texas woman who was removed from life support last month because of economic considerations despite her being conscious and responsive. I'm not really sure what I think about the issue or the concept behind the article. But its interesting and I'm curious to see what you guys think about it. http://www.slate.com/id/2133518/ I wonder where all those spotlight-hogging jackasses that went to bat for Terry Schiavo were during all this. Does the "Culture of Life" not include people in the president's own back yard? Or does it just not include those who can't afford it?

QUOTE(WCSox @ Jan 3, 2006 -> 11:42 AM) From what I've seen, that seems to be the biggest problem, as three major religions claim Jerusalem to be one of their major holy sites. By turning it completely over to the Israelis, the U.N. made a huge mistake. IIRC, The Muslim Dome of the Rock is located on the same site that Jews believe Solomon's temple once stood. This, fundamentally is what started all the fighting, no? Religion sucks

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 27, 2005 -> 02:33 PM) -My Dad who I haven't talked to but once in the last 11 years (only at my brothers wedding at that) sent the baby a present over with my brother who still talks to him like normal. We opened it while they were there, but I have been having second thoughts about things since then. On one hand I don't want to deprive the kid of a grandparent, but on the other hand, there are some very good reasons that I don't talk to my father, and I don't know if I want her to have to deal with him either. Any advice? I have this overwealming desire to box the stuff he gave her up and send it back. A jackass is a jackass, regardless of genetics. If your dad did something so bad that you want nothing to do with him, then I wouldn't subject your kid to him either. Just MHO.

Take a look at me Tell me do you like what you see Do you think you can - Do you think you can do me? Kiss me pretty baby Touch me all over Girl what makes you think you can do with me Do you think you can do me - yeah Do me baby Oh Do me baby Do you think you can Do me baby Do me Do me baby Yeah, now that's it Girl let your hair down Take off your clothes And leave on your shoes Would you mind if I looked at you for a moment Before I make sweet love Back stage Under age Adolescent How ya doin? Fine, she replied I said, I'd like to do the wild thing Action took place Hey, kind of wet Come on, don't forget The J the I the M the M the Y, yo I need a body bag Do me baby - Oh Do me baby You can do me when you want to do me Do me baby - yeah Do me baby I like it in the morning time - yeah Sometimes I love it in the eventing, baby Can you do me all over - yeah yeah yeah The time was 6 o'clock on this swatch watch No time to chill Got a date, I can't be late Hey - the girl is gonna do me Move to the Jacuzzi Ooh that booty Smack it up, flip it, rub it down OH NOOOO Do me baby Yeah, Do me baby Oh baby, I like it just like that I love the way you do it to me baby Do me baby Oh, Move just a little bit closer You can do me in the morning You can do me in the night You can do me when you wanna do me (x2) I love the way you touch me when you touch my body all over baby

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Dec 21, 2005 -> 08:06 AM) I don't know about some of this, but he touches on my pet peeve of this arguement and that is the arrogence of academia when it comes to ID, and actually to most arguements. The air of all knowingness and the willingness to look down their noses at anyone who would dare believe in something other than what they publish is the most irritating part of all of this. Either you believe in ID, or you are somekind of 18th churchhouse knuckledragger. My pet peeve is that this writer(and many others who agree with his position), are hiding behind a false front of "ID just means that there's something bigger than what we see/know/etc." What they REALLY mean--and it's alluded to in his article, where he brings up how a perfect god made himself into an imperfect man yet still remained perfect--is that people need to embrace the christian view of the world. If they were TRULY interested in the pursuit of any more intelligent being, then they would bring up the possibility of aliens, or the buddhist version, or whatever(yes, even the flying spaghetti monster!). They have no interest in this-- they only want the christian version "taught." And to me, the christian theory has as much evidence to support it as the aforementioned pasta demon.

Jones decried the "breathtaking inanity" of the Dover policy and accused several board members of lying to conceal their true motive, which he said was to promote religion. A six-week trial over the issue yielded "overwhelming evidence" establishing that intelligent design "is a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism, and not a scientific theory," said Jones, a Republican and a churchgoer appointed to the federal bench three years ago.

Liz

QUOTE(RibbieRubarb @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 05:35 PM) Exactly Steff. No where in the story of Chanukah does it compromise the role of Jesus. We are still celebrating his birth, then we are observing another gift from God that happened some 300-400 years before the birth of Jesus. That's how we are approaching it. Steff: Mrs. Ribbie says "Hi" right back at cha! Technically true, but then I still don't understand what the end result would be here. Are you saying that you believe that you can follow two different religions, by piecing them together and avoiding the parts where they would conflict? Again, I'm severely curious, that's all.

QUOTE(Steff @ Dec 16, 2005 -> 05:21 PM) Can't they show him the different ways of celebration without compromising their personal beliefs..? Sure, and that's what I was trying to figure out. Was RR "celebrating" the holiday, and claiming to follow both faiths? Or was it more along the lines of "we do this, but other people have a different faith and holiday called this, and I'll show you how they celebrate it"

This won't be the most popular answer: OK, I can see why you'd encourage a child to be as educated an knowledgeable as possible about different people/cultures/religions/etc. But, by celebrating it, doesn't that cause some confusion in a young child? I mean, you raise him as a christian(if that's what you're doing) but then celebrate a holiday from a religion that does not endorse jesus' role as the son of god. If you're trying to keep him a christian, doesn't this weaken any teaching that being christian is the way to go? Not trying to be a jerk here, just curious as to where you're going with this.

The Democratic-ness or Republican-ness of the person in question is irrelevant. Haven't we all figured that out by now? A politician in either camp has one agenda first and foremost-- their own personal gain. Why some people continue to think that "their team" whether that be Rep. or Dem, gives a rat's ass about what's best for the country is mind-boggling to me. Arguing over whether Dems or Reps are the better collective is ridiculous -- they both suck. As Thomas Jefferson said, "I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all."

QUOTE(mreye @ Dec 8, 2005 -> 11:33 AM) Wow. Just wow. I want to be married. The married people I know want to be married. Maybe you're hanging with the wrong people. I know plenty of married couples at my church that have been together forever. We just had a couple renew their vows to celebrate their 60th anniversary. I didn't say it was everyone. People celebrating their 60th anniversary, for example, are of a different generation with a different mindset and culture. You also go to church, which will change the perspective drastically. Most people don't attend church regularly anymore so keep that in mind.

QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Dec 8, 2005 -> 11:03 AM) By the way, I find it interesting that people always focus on the 50% of marriages that don't work. Well, that means 50% of marriages DO work. Is the glass half empty or half full? If it's 50-50, then that's half-empty because of the level a person needs to be invested in a marriage. You can afford really bad odds when you're only investing $2, like when you buy a lottery ticket. However, if you're investing $500,000, you need to have better odds. For example, lets say buying a house was a lifetime committment. You buy the house, you're supposed to live in it until you die, and if you don't there are many large penalties on many different levels. Now lets say you see research that says that 50% of home buyers end up leaving that home and you hear stories about what the penalties are and what they can do to a person. In some cases, their whole life is destroyed. Having that information, would you buy a house? Ever?

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Dec 8, 2005 -> 10:55 AM) I agree with you here 100%. The 50% failure rate is in large part due to a whole lot of folks getting married that really shouldn't because the marriages are doomed from the start. I mean, who could have predicted the Spears/Federline marriage was going to end badly? I believe in that to a degree, but then I just take a look at my own friends/family-- if that many of them made the wrong choice, maybe it's the choice in general that was wrong, and not the person. My parents, divorced after 28 years. My friend's parents, divorced after 33 years. My other friend's parents, divorced after 38 years. My coworker, just divorced after 14 years. Eddie and Valerie, divorced after 24 years. I could rattle off other examples all day, but could only point to a few examples that I know of of happily married couples, and ones who I could look at and say, "that's exactly what I would want for myself." IMHO, I don't think most people want to be married-- they do it because they think they're supposed to.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Dec 8, 2005 -> 09:53 AM) Spoken like a true member of the Eternal Bachelor Herd. Very true. But seriously, I don't see the point of attempting that level of committment to something that has the success rate of a coin flip

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Dec 7, 2005 -> 11:21 PM) I agree, fight the system and get married far away from a church. Or, just don't do it at all.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Dec 6, 2005 -> 05:03 PM) The canonization of the bible certainly has its issues. But - I think the gosphels are pretty much where your money should lie as at least your foundation. The letters that Paul wrote to the churches to clarify certain things... are just that... letters. The gosphels, while stories about Jesus, also have much DIRECT text from Jesus himself, and that is how we should live our lives. I also think that Hebrews, while the author is "unknown" (but most likely Paul), puts the facts together very well of the transition between the old testament and the new. Christians in the past couldn't even agree on which gospels were canon, and which weren't. The Gnostic gospels, for example. If you were to believe that the gospels contain "DIRECT text from Jesus," then why is the gospel of Thomas not in the bible? Who decided that John(which is chock full of contradictions that raise many questions as to its true source) is in, but Thomas is out?

QUOTE(southsideirish @ Dec 6, 2005 -> 03:46 PM) Examples please. I can give you many examples in the New World Translation if you like. I would like to see examples of how other organizations changed theirs just so it would suit their own beliefs. Not only that but the New World Translation was translated by someone that was not even taught in the ancient Biblical languages. It is hard to translate something that you don't even know. Here are some examples: New World Translation I wasn't referring so much to the actual translation of the bible from the original hebrew and greek scripts, but rather the subjective "picking and choosing" of what books/letters/gospels et al get to be part of the bible, and which do not. But even in the case of the actual literary translations, there are many instances where scholars disagree on what exactly is being said. Different religions choose which translation works best for them, and then that particular version is the "correct" one. But back to my point, the romans bickered for years over which books were "god's word," and which ones weren't. People were murdered over their opinions on the topic, and the bible changed numerous times by addition and subtraction over hundreds of years. Even today, religions differ based on which parts of the bible they choose to believe or not.

QUOTE(southsideirish @ Dec 6, 2005 -> 03:33 PM) I understand what you are saying. However it is hard to learn from the Bible the correct way using the Jehova Witnessess' Bible because they change it to fit their beliefs. The New World Translation is the Bible they use. SSI, every religion has changed the bible to fit their ideas on god, jesus, etc. Every religion thinks their compilation is the "correct" one.

Please, everyone knows Rex is more into the Metrosexual type.

I'd like to add perhaps the most logically-flawed, common sense-devoid script ever produced: Maximum Overdrive.