sox4lifeinPA

who is israel4ever, Alex?

I will not make the same mistake twice.... just when I had that horrific picture out of my head. :fufinger

I remember your friend, He was the one who got married? I had a friend take this class last semester and she got a "B"... no offense to her, but she's a blonde texan. I shouldn't have much trouble gettin' an "A".

my prof is head of ag econ at A&M. Apparently he just teaches from powerpoint. I'm not even buying the book. If I have questions, I'll ask.

Macro Econ and Psych

that'll replace the whale in me nightmares.... f u konan....

was the 8pm slot too late for you, old man?

quality post tex. I fully support what you have to say. guys like beastly and begood, need to confrom a little better, but we also need to be a little more open. give and take. southsider and texsox know ALL about that

two things... I really agree with Tex. I think that's a valid arguement and something that is a major concern. Where does the line stop? secondly, within the current system, although my personal beliefs are one thing, I have maintained that I recognize that the greater population does not think the same as I do. Therefore, I agree with Winodj's comments. Allow gay men and women to go to a court house or justice of the peace and get "married" there. My point is, it just doesn't belong in the church. ok, have a great week. I just wanted to make a comment or two and say HI! PA is rockin' my world. 4 inches of snow last night! Dammit it Tex, I want the warm weather back

Later peeps... "screw this crap I've HAD it (I've had it)" -weezer I'm off to find love in PA. I'll see you in a week, maybe. Mr. Alex Sox4life

ok, from now on let only men have sex with me and women with women...without the aid of science (which is NOT nature) how long will the human race last?? Natural reproduction or life=Man+Woman The politics of people desiring that one thing is inferred from biblical text over another works both ways, *****. I find it immearsuably hard to believe that of all the intellectual and brilliant men and women of God I know, and of all the people who had to ok those translations....Just now we see that homosexual behaviors aren't a bad thing? and it turns out that we've been wrong all along...it's not really in the text. I just don't buy it. I'll admit that you have more knowledge on this than I...but I've discussed this topic with many different people of many different backgrounds and it all comes up the same. oh well, but I'M the one who's wrong because you're the ordained one. Rev Al Sharpton Rev James Baker Dr E.V. Hill Rev Jesse Jackson Pat Robertson Jerry Fallwell f-ing psychos who are alledged men of God. I'm not saying you belong on that list...I'm just saying that going to seminary means little to me.

I very much agree with you winodj, and I've maintained this throughout. churches=no government=yes regarding the recoginition of same sex marriages/unions...

as one of the ones you weren't trying to offend...you succedded. I appreciate your thoughts, ghost. thanks.

BEGOOD....that's not being good at all. steff's not a biatch. She's very nice and most definitely going to kick your new yoker @ss now.

I'm gonna try to finish "The Metamorphosis" and "Every Man's Battle" on the plane ride tomorrow morning. Hopefully I can fit in a B&N visit at some point....borders might work too.

my question is...when will the dude ACTUALLY LEAVE???!?!?! scram sox4life!!!

I would first conceed that it's not my place to judge unbelievers "for that is God's place" and not mine. Most of what I'm saying and if you read what I've posted so far, is that inside of the church, devoid of government laws, etc, God most certainly has opinions about personal sexuality. I'm just confused about your Theology, *****... You inferred that I was sinning because of my judgements on others. So, by your logic...I can stick my dick in another guys rectum, call myself a Christian and say that it's "love", but I can't call another person on that action because the Bible plainly states that A)we should avoid sexual immorality B)do not associate with "brothers" who participate in sexual immorality because they're going to be judged by God in Holy Wrath?? That's some very bad theology buddy. And it's even worse for those claiming it as Biblically sound. I'm all for loving relationships...but it's clear as day it's wrong.

That's actually a good philosophy. The Church is bankrupt.

no doubt that everyone would fail if we put up a list of "bad things" we've done. That's the point. however, it's what you do with yourself after you've realized this idea. Cwsox, I checked it out and it's about 50/50 on the inclusion of the word "homosexual". I can admit that there's room for "political" inclusion of this word. It points to a specific act that church elders, ministers, and religious theologists agree is an act that isn't Godly. regardless, there's no discussion of smack users, dog abusers, or chicken f-ing in the bible, and most people agree that those are activities that people should not participate in. I know that it doesn't sit well with people, alot of things about the bible don't sit well with me. That's not my choice. God is God. I like to listen to your opinions on these topics, because I am trusting that your backgroung is legit. However, I don't share the same emerging Christian views as you do. We're not going to have a productive discussion, because we interpret the bible differently. we should just agree to disagree.

btw...I voted for no amendment.

I should just stop here I think... This is neither the time nor the place to discuss matters of Religion. I'm sorry I brought it up.

apparently someone didn't read this thread...someone already pointed that out you unoriginal bastard I think it speaks more on my behalf. My musical tastes weren't watered down with the Slitz Malt Liquer of musicians...Don Henley.

I wasn't saying that... I'm just saying that in no way shape or form were the beatles EVER indie.

and just for the sake of arguement... New American standard version (a cwsox approved translation of the bible) 1 Corinthians 6:4-6 (4)Do not be deceived; (5) neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will (6) inherit the kingdom of God.

I think we're arguing two different things. I think from a church standpoint, it doesn't follow what is written if we support gay marriages. I, however, recognize the secular viewpoint and US laws. If one person has a certain right and priviledge, then others should not be unable to receive that same benefit.