Way to jump on the semantics band wagon Jill.

I don't think they're going to be sending people to the lethal injection chair because they killed a police dog. And, if someone kills a woman regardless if she's pregnant, they're still getting charged with murder.

This is why we have jurries and judges. They look at each crime on a case by case basis. Something that a legislative body can't do despite their best knee jerk pop sentiment antics. In the case of an obviously pregnant woman, and a murderer targeting her fetus as well as her... I think we can have a little confidence in the process to determine if this is more agregious than just murder. You can't legislate everything, and for many things, such as this, it presents more constitutional problems and isn't going to make a killer stop and think... hmmmm I wonder if she's pregnant? It's retarted.

"According to ABC on July 3, "[t]he bill to make it a felony to kill a police dog sailed through the [North Carolina] legislature, and the bill to make it double murder to kill a pregnant mother is bottled up in a committee... [due to the] volatile debate over abortion."

even the dogs themselves would be against this....

Jill:

The legislative delay is obviously caused by an element that reflects a materialistic world view, where all that there is, well, is material. Since a baby isn't born yet it is this element's abilty to reason and thus declare that entity a persona non grata. To that same element, a dog in the world is here and hence has value. It's a world view that is absolutely sick, twisted, blasphemous, perverted and punishable by eternal hellfire.

Animals have more value than human beings? Only an imbecile could hold to such a view and a self-decieved one at that.

This is why you have a large segment of the American population who would give their lives to save a tree or a whale, but not even blink at a mother killing her own child in the womb. People who hold this view are dribbling idiots and we should have utmost compassion at their hopeless world view. Their god is entropy, decay and anhilation.

It's a world turned upside down by the philosophies of Marxism, Saganism, Communism, Humanism and Nihilism.

We recently had a case in my state. I live about 45 minutes from where this took place. The police officer killed his wife and unborn daughter. Her name was Jessie and she was almost due to have baby Chloe when she disappeared. Her ex husband is now charged with 2 counts of murder, after she was found dead. Sounds like the Scott Peterson case all over again. If the unborn child is a murder victim in this case, then shouldn't abortionists be considered serial killers?

The difference between the two is that an abortion is generally(except for the occasional extenuating circumstance) carried out because of the desire of the mother not to deal with a pregnancy. The murder of a pregnant woman terminates the life of the fetus without the consent of the woman, taking out the aspect of her choice as to whether or not she wants to carry a child. I'm not really trying to defend anything either way, I'm just pointing out the difference.

Erin... you're pointing out subtleties beyond their capacities.

In the anti-choice way of non-thinking, a felony = murder charge, a misdemeanor = "serious criminal offense" (review Tiller rants), and abortion doctor = police dog assault. Without hyperbole and conflating everything, then they don’t have their foolish irony with which to demonstrate their foolishness.

HisMan,

Persona non grata, means someone who is not welcome. Blocking such a stupid law from passing does not render fetuses unwelcome.

Heather4scinn.

"If the unborn child is a murder victim in this case, then shouldn't abortionists be considered serial killers?"

Well then... of course, in anti-choice double-speak, that must mean Jessie was a willing accomplice in Chloe’s death, and her case is incidental suicide.

Cameron, I didn't understand a word you said. I shouldn't be surprised. I never understand you.

Cameron:

Jill's post was omparing how the dog deal went right through and the baby deal was being delayed. The point is that there is an element in the legislature that has a problem with a fetus being a person.

My point is that most pro-choicers can't deal with the fact that a baby in the womb is a person. If it was a person to them, they couldn't sanction it's killing and therefore support abortion.

So, the way over this hurdle for pro-choicers is to depersonalize the baby or to take away it's personhood and declare such a person a persona non grata. What is a better example of an unwelcome person than a baby about to be aborted?

"According to ABC on July 3, "[t]he bill to make it a felony to kill a police dog sailed through the [North Carolina] legislature, and the bill to make it double murder to kill a pregnant mother is bottled up in a committee... [due to the] volatile debate over abortion."

Explained Democrat State Sen. A. B. Swindell, "All animals are parts of folk's family."

Swindell opposed the comparisons being made. "The police dog thing - I see that as something different as getting to debate on [the abortion] issue."

Intentional or not, Swindell made two assessments. First, he implied animals are family and preborn children are not. Second, he tied a Laci/Connor Peterson-type murder to abortion."

See, the thing is that abortion takes the life of a fetus with consent from the mother/host organism. Killing a pregnant woman and her fetus is murder because there is no consent there. I'm pretty positive on that one.

On the subject of police dogs, that's a bit touchy. I'm a bit biased considering I'm not a fan of bigger dogs in general, and I've also seen what police dogs can do to people [I've had a few friends who've been basically mauled by them], so I'm not their biggest fans. However, I think that making it a felony to kill a police dog is a bit, well, idiotic. If it's a felony to kill a police dog, it should be a felony to kill any dog, or any domesticated animal [with the exception of livestock and food animals, that is]. Hell, why not make it illegal to kill any animal? That would be just so much better! ::sarcasm is dripping out of my mouth::

See what I mean? I do somewhat agree with making the murder of a pregnant woman double murder, but screw that police dog noise. Dog is a dog. It dies in the line of fire, too bad, so sad. I'm not an animal hater, I really do love them. I just think that if we're going to put dogs above humans, well, then we need to hit ourselves in the head and get our priorities straight.

Heather If the unborn child is a murder victim in this case, then shouldn't abortionists be considered serial killers?

That story is on the news here too...
I heard an interview and the reason he can be charged with a double murder is the the baby was past viability. Ridiculous, I know, but there you have it.

So the only ones that could be charged as serial killers are Mr. Tiller and his ilk...at least, as of now...

HisMan,

Nobody opposed to this bill is doing so based the human/person argument.

They're opposed to it because criminalizing fetal injury has never been done before and it opens up a judicial can of worms. The intention of this sort of legislation is to end abortions eventually, and that means holding women responsible. We're talking about eventually making women liable for prenatal maternal negligence as well as overt attempts to abort. We're talking about calling CSI when she misscarries to see if there was any foul play on the part of her or anyone else. We're talking about a disgruntled boyfriends and husbands telling jurries that she smoked a cigarette, worked-out at the gym, or had a beer, and is therefore responsible for the death of the fetus.

It's orwellian.

"My point is that most pro-choicers can't deal with the fact that a baby in the womb is a person. If it was a person to them, they couldn't sanction it's killing and therefore support abortion."

No. That's just your characterization of pro-choice, and unless you're completely retarded, you know by now, after all these threads, on what grounds we sanction abortion.

Anyone here, prochoice or prolife, comfortable with carrying a child for seven months,that you desperately want, being murdered and the person who did it getting away with it?

Hey doorknob (MK)!!!

Just because we don't call it murder at the moment doesn't mean they're getting away with it.

Cameron,

That's exactly what we've been trying to tell YOU for the last five months...bravo, you finally get it.

The intention of this sort of legislation is to end abortions eventually, and that means holding women responsible.

I'm sorry, I thought we were in for the purpose of ending abortion. But now you say it's murder...

VALLLLLL- I'm so confused!

*tacklehug MK*

Hiiiiiii!!

*tacklehugs for Bethany too*

Rae,

How about me??

Oh! Sorry Mary, I didn't see you here!

*tacklehugs for Mary toooooo*

Rae,

...and me ??

...

No comment, Jasper.

And dare I ask, what's with the "Rae-Rae" thing?

ohhh, no hugs for me.. *sad face*

"Rae-Rae" ?....well, when I was growning up I had a close friend named "Ray", and when he was younger, they use to call him "Ray-Ray".....

...see, no harm

Jasper,

I'll tacklehug you, though I'm sure you'd prefer Rae and the other pretty and much younger ladies on this blog!

*ooomph*

Did anyone get that mullets license number?

No Mary, I'll take a hug from you anyday! Alot of younger ones don't care for me too much..

Awwww...Jasper, here's a mullet hug! Although I'm an old lady too...sorry!

Thanks MK, you're not an old lady either... I saw you myself!.....

Eh? let me turn up my hearing aid...

Much better...

MK!!

Turn up your hearing aid? Such an attractive lady as yourself! I saw you too!! I get the impression Jasper would love a hug from you!

Jasper,

A younger man wants a tacklehug from me?? Here I come! Kaaaa-lunk! The sound of Jasper being knocked to the floor.

Rae, thanks for the tackle hug....I needed it!

"A younger man wants a tacklehug from me?? Here I come! Kaaaa-lunk! The sound of Jasper being knocked to the floor."

sounds good to me!

So how is everybody this evening? I'm getting over a mild stomach virus and am watching the Twins kick the White Sox's butts!

....Ok Rae, have a glass of ginger-ale.

Red-Sox got their butts licked by Detriot Tigers..

has anybody seen the movie- "apocalypto" by Mel Gibson... going to watch it tonight...

opps i mean "kicked".....ha

I haven't seen "Apocalypto" but my brother saw it and he liked it. But my brother loves uber violent movies, can't say that I care for them. I'm also not a big fan of Mr. Gibson myself so I refuse to watch it.

I'm waiting for "Hot Fuzz" to come out on DVD...British comedies are made of awesome. Has anybody here seen "Shaun of the Dead"?

Jasper,

The Detroit Tigers! My hometown. Go Tigers. Thank you for your correction. Licked? ptui.

Rae,
If you're going to have a glass of ginger ale it can only be Vernor's, another Detroit product. I used to drink it by the six pack. I hope you are feeling better. Ginger ale is great for an unsettled stomach.

Shaun of the dead is hilarious! LOL But it's sooooo weird!

Rae, sorry you're getting over a stomach virus too..Hopefully it'll be over soon!

No, I haven't seen that Rae, I'm not one for British humor ( except Benny Hill, your too young to remember)

"I'm also not a big fan of Mr. Gibson myself so I refuse to watch it."

You didn't like: The Patriot or Braveheart ? Those were fantastic movies...

I'm not a fan of Leonardo Decaprio (politically), but I thought he was great in "The Departed". The movie is based on a True story about the south Boston Irish Mob.

...Good-Night Rae

Jasper, you should see it. It's funny. Here's my favorite scene- he's totally oblivious to whats going on around him:
here

Rae,

I know what you mean about uber violent movies. They literally make me ill and I'm depressed for days after watching them. Definitely not my idea of entertainment. Many years ago I cancelled HBO when they went from excellent documentaries and good movies to gore and violence. I told the rep that too when I cancelled. Apparently lots of people were cancelling for the same reason. I love adventure, suspense, drama, and horror movies, but minus the gore. The horror movies we enjoyed as kids were the kind where you never knew what was behind the next corner or when a ghost would pop out of nowhere.

Jasper,

Sounds good to you?? You made my night!!

Braveheart...love that movie!

A great movie was "Ruthless People" with Bette Midler and Danny Devito. Hilarious. Plots, subplots, and counterplots and two cops who are oblivious to all of it, they're only trying to solve Bette Midler's kidnapping.
My all time favorite is "Towering Inferno" from 1975. Incredible movie. I could watch it 100 more times.

LOL, yes, that does seem funny Bethany, I'll check it out....

Eh, I honestly just don't like Mel Gibson's movies and I'm not fond of his acting either. *shrugs*

@Bethany: Oooooh! Yay! Somebody else who loves Shaun of the Dead! I have so many favorite scenes in that movie...but lately I've been loving the scene where they are in the pub and they are whacking the bartender with pool cues to the beat of "Don't Stop Me Now" by Queen. You should see "Hot Fuzz", it's a parody of all those buddy-cop action flicks...it's pretty fantastic.

@Mary: Usually gore doesn't bother me too much, because I realize that it's fake, but I hate movies that are just fight-fight-fight (like Lord of the Rings...so boring! It's literally one beig battle...). Though the one movie that was so gory/gross that ever made me really cringe was "Requiem for a Dream". Let's just say that that movie totally proved to me how bad heroin was and that I would NEVER want to try it. *shudders*

One of my all-time favs is "Smokey and the Bandit" Burt Reynolds, Sally Field and Jackie Gleason was great in it. I remember going to see it in 1977....

Rae,

Well, that movie at least had some redeeming social value if it turned you, and I'm sure others, away from heroin. The title sounds so beautiful too.
Even if I know the gore is fake, I just cannot stomach it.

@Mary: Well, I was never into the whole "drug" thing anyway, but man did that movie make me cringe! I honestly felt so bad for the main characters, being so chained down to their addictions to the point of the sheer desperation they found themselves in. My college roomie and I were watching this and afterward were in just this awful state of "blaaaah-depression" afterwards. Like, we were seriously depressed after watching it.

So in order to cheer ourselves up we watched Monty Python and the Holy Grail. :D

Braveheart was great because of Patrick McGoohan, and for no other reason. Everything else about it was poor.

I'd say my favorite movie about heroin is Liquid Sky. (If you haven't seen it, see it.) Trainspotting was pretty good too.

Cmaeron:

Abortion is not optional and is not sanctionable.

Jasper,

At last! I've found some common ground with you! Braveheart and Patriot were both amazing movies, and I did like the Passion of the Christ. I don't agree with the message, but I liked the depiction of what happened to hundreds of thousands of people back in that era. The fact that Gibson had the stones to make that kind of movie with that much detail is something I do respect.

PS William Wallace owns all. Though I don't agree with him doing Braveheart based off of the poem by Blind Harry, I think it's good nonetheless.

PPS GO RED SOX! You a member of the Red Sox Nation?

DanS,

Let me ask you something...in all seriousness...Do you believe that Jesus (whoever He was) actually, physically existed?

Rae,

Coincidentally, I just posted a song from The Holy Grail in honor of Cameron on the previous post...

another example of sick and twisted minds thinking alike...

Rae,

I'm afraid I worded that badly. I meant that if the movie shows the true horror of addiction and turns people away from heroin, great. Certainly, if this movie opened your eyes to the horrors of heroin addiction, it did to several other people as well, which is good. Its like you or I would never support drunk driving, but I believe we all need to see and know the tragic results of it.
You're right about what slaves people are to addictions. We had one case in my state where an addicted mother turned her adolescent daughter over to her drug dealer as payment for drugs. One can only imagine the horrors that child endured.

Monty Python? I never cared for him at all. If you ever get a chance watch "Ruthless People".

Oh Mary,

No Monty Python? How about Faulty Towers. I could watch that and Monk for hours on end...

I've seen Ruthless People...a long time ago...wasn't Danny DiVito in it? Bette Midler gets kidnapped? I do remember enjoying it...

I too love horror films...but my number one rule is "DONT SHOW US THE MONSTER"...No monster can be as scary as my imagination and the minute you show me a mechanical or computerized "monster" the fear just goes right out of the movie...Halloween, The Omen, The Exorcist...oooooohhh scaaaaary....

Hi MK,

Yes, Ruthless People starred Danny Devito and Bette Midler as husband and wife and yes, she is kidnapped. Danny is plotting with his mistress to get rid of Bette while the mistress is plotting with her incredibly stupid boyfriend to get rid of Danny. It just goes on from there with plots, counterplots, and subplots and two detectives who are completely oblivious to all of it, they just want to find Bette. It is a scream.

I liked The Omen and The Exorcist, which was quite a shocker for its day. I remember seeing it at the movies. Halloween was just too gory. I liked the earlier more classic horror movies, like the original 13 Ghosts or House on Haunted Hill. The remakes don't hold a candle to them.
Nothing will ever beat The Towering Inferno" though.

Cameron,

Call me a retard again and I'll sic Jasper on you.

When will you learn grasshoppa to stop name-calling?

I'm really concerned about your image here.

Notice the girls haven't blown you any kisses lately?

And you've managed to awake the sleeping and formidable giant MK.

You did it to yourself man. I can't help you.

(Yawn)
*GGGRRRRRRRRRRRRR*

Hisman,

He makes it so easy. I mean he hands you the insults on a silver platter...They're all "give me's"...Even I can't resist the temptations...

And as I pointed out...spellcheck is our friend. Retarted indeed...

Cameron is like the wicked witch of the west. He's melting. Just as predicted, his shock value has worn off. It's kind of like Howard Stern. At first people go "I cannot BELIEVE he just said that." After a while people take him for what he is.... A juvenile potty mouth. Howard doesn't shock me anymore. I find him rather boring. Cameron doesn't shock me anymore either. Just here to play games. Probably bored.

"Let me ask you something...in all seriousness...Do you believe that Jesus (whoever He was) actually, physically existed?"

@ MK: Yes, historically, there was a Jesus of Nazareth. Whether he was really the son of God is up for debate. I believe that Jesus was just a really charismatic and revolutionary, liberal guy with a ton of good ideas and knew how to work a crowd. I can't honestly say that what he did or didn't do in his life is fact or fiction, nor can any of us for that matter, because none of us were there. However, in answer to your question, yes, I believe that there was a Jesus of Nazareth.

Dan,

Where do you get your information from? Not that he existed, but that he was charismatic and reolutionary, liberal with tons of good ideas?

SHDan,

Yes, I heard about the Blind Harry tale, but I think the overall theme was correct about the battles for Scottish independence and Wallace's brutal death, etc. Edinburgh is great, been there a couple times for work.. Yes, Red-sox nation member here....

"Apocalyto" is another good one by Gibson...

Peace brother....

Animal rights activists don't love animals. They hate people.

HisMan,

I didn't call you a retard. I said you are one if realy don't know, after all these discussion, what the prochoice position is. Seriously, how do you expect to convince anybody of anything if you can't even acknowledge nature of the argument? Alas, I think you do know, but you are cowardly avoiding the genuine argument because you can't support your notions with any legitimate tactic beyond misrepresenting the opposing argument--strawman.

"abortion is not optional and is not sanctionable."

You wish!

compulsory Gestation is not sanctionable.

"I can't honestly say that what he did or didn't do in his life is fact or fiction, nor can any of us for that matter, because none of us were there."

But but but but... it's written down in a book, and if it's in writting... it must be true!!

;-D

Zeke,
Great point!!!!

Cameron:

You said, "They're opposed to it because criminalizing fetal injury has never been done before and it opens up a judicial can of worms." I don't believe this s true. Was not Scott Peterson convicted of killing his wife and his baby and is now on death row? I stated my position and you know it.

Skinhead Dan and Cameron:

In our system of law, a person can be sentenced to death on the testimony of just one person, that's O-N-E.

Over 500 people witnessed Jesus alive after they witnessed him crucified and killed, yes, and a spear driven though his side to make sure he was dead. And if it wasn't written down how was the early church to record such a monumental event, on their digital video recorders?

The evidence is overwhelming and any attorney will tell you that the case for Christ's death and resurrection are irrefutable based on the eyewitness accounts of not one but hundreds of people. Now, having said that, Jesus' self-made claims about his divinity must be true because He was raised after he was killed. Not something a mere mortal is capable of. Now if that was true we would be wise to listen to his other claims about sin, judgement, etc.

Now, I know Cameron is pretty smart, well, knowledgable and good at reasoning, albeit based on false assumptions and thereby just plain wrong. However, he has chosen to blind himself to the evidence. He would rather believe the lie that we evolved from monkeys when there is no evidence of such rather than believe that Jesus Christ is who He says He is when there is a mountain of evidence.

We've tried and tried SD to show Cameron, however, he just won't see it. Will you be as blind as well?

Hey MK, hope you're doing well after you're surgery. Looks like you're back at full strength. When I opened the site I heard your growl and you scared me....waaaaaaaah! I warned Cam and SD. Leave some for the vultures will ya?

You know, I've always been a fan of Mel Gibson's work, but Apocalypto, though full of special effect eye candy that I absolutely love, was just a little too fatalistic for my taste. The hero really didn't escape through any brilliance or strength of his own- deux ex mechina always ruins things.

I liked Passion of the Christ- but for a different reason than most, probably. It was a very graphic portrayal of the crucifiction process- one which thousands of people went through under Roman rule. Children, women, and many other innocents were executed in the exact same manner as Jesus of Nazareth. It's tragic to me because of what it shows that many people suffered- not because of the trials of one man.

@ Jasper:P

"Yes, I heard about the Blind Harry tale, but I think the overall theme was correct about the battles for Scottish independence and Wallace's brutal death, etc. Yes, Red-sox nation member here...."

Rock on, my friend. The overall theme was correct, and the movie itself was very well done. The certain historical inaccuracies did annoy me a bit, but who cares? AS for the Red Sox Nation, I'm jealous. I'm not from Boston, so according to a buddy of mine, I can't join just on the sheer fact that I'm a foreigner. Hmph. Oh well... YANKEES SUCK, RED SOX RULE!

Tessie, don't blame us if we ever doubt ya
You know we couldn't live without ya
Tessie, you are the only, ooooooonly!

@MK:

"Where do you get your information from? Not that he existed, but that he was charismatic and reolutionary, liberal with tons of good ideas?"

Small confession... [I used to entertain the idea of becoming a Christian missionary when I was younger, around the age of 13 or so.] I've read the bible a few times, and I've read a lot of books on the Bible, both for and against it's legitimacy. Given what I've read from those books, and what I've read from the Bible, I put together my own opinion on who Jesus was, and what he was like. I'm not saying I'm right, or that I'm wrong. This is my opinion that has been formed over time and from talking to many different people. For all I know, I could be 100% right, or 100% wrong. I just stick to my beliefs.

And I apologize if I'm putting word in your mouth SH Dan, but MK, I think what he also means by "liberal" is not so much the way we normally define it politically but instead in terms of progression? Some of Jesus's ideas like caring for the poor and the whole "judge not lest ye be judged" stuff is pretty progressive for his time. The fact that he spoke of rehabilitating sinners instead of just killing them or shunning them also appears as progressive and "futuristic" so to speak as opposed to the traditional values at the time.

Does that make sense at all? I don't think he's using liberal in the current-day sense of the word.

@ HisMan:

I'm not blind. I like to educate myself before I make any sort of decision. Please don't call me blind, or put words in my mouth that were never there.

SH Dan, I haven't interacted with you 1 on 1 much. However, I do want to say how kind it was of you to give your well wishes to Dan.{ The man injured in the motorcycle accident.} Cameron can't even do that much! He'd rather fight with me on that post. You said you couldn't pray for him, but at least you showed some human compassion and concern. Cameron is totally lost!

SH Dan, PS Sorry about your uncle. I know of quite a few people who were also killed riding motorcycles.

SH Dan,

I second Heather4life. I too was very impressed by your post and the compassion and concern it expressed. I just didn't want to say so on that thread since those are messages for Dan.
Your post showed a lot of class on your part, something Cameron was sadly lacking when he posted his message to Dan.

HisMan,

"I don't believe this s true."

That pretty much sums up anything and everything for you. One big confirmation bias.

Erin,

Have you ever seen the Last Temptation of Christ. There's this great scene where Defoe is raising Lazarus, and has this ghastly expression on his face when it actually works... sort of revolted and frightened.

Erin,

I liked Passion of the Christ- but for a different reason than most, probably. It was a very graphic portrayal of the crucifiction process- one which thousands of people went through under Roman rule. Children, women, and many other innocents were executed in the exact same manner as Jesus of Nazareth. It's tragic to me because of what it shows that many people suffered- not because of the trials of one man.

While that is true and also sad, how many of them died this horrific way,

because they loved you?

SDan,

Okay, so you've read the bible, and books about the bible.

So basically the bible is either a bunch a hooey or it contains the truth. If you are willing to accept the fact that Jesus existed physically and even to make the leap that he was charismatic, liberal, good and revolutionary, how do you reconcile that with the fact that you don't believe everything it says.

Do you do the same thing with books on Caligula, or Helen of Troy or even the history of your first love, Scotland. These stories also came from books, or from subjective interpretations about what kind of men and women these people were.

Can we just pick and choose which parts of a particular historical pictorial we believe or dismiss?

If you had said that you believe the whole thing was a myth, like Zeus or Pandora, I could see where you are coming from. But basically the only books we have on Jesus are the Gospels and the letters of the apostles. We have very few other sources to back them up or refute them.

So it is hard for me to understand how you believe that he lived because you read it in the bible but you don't believe the rest of what you read in the same book.

Do you see?

Rae,

Not only don't I mind that you offered your opinion, but you are welcome to answer the same questions.

I'm not too concerned about what Dan thinks about Jesus, just where he gets his info...yet.

Hi MK,

Did you see the movie "Jesus of Nazareth", I think I liked that one better than "Passion of the Christ"

Jasper,

I didn't, I don't think. But I loved the Passion.

I loved the portrayal of Satan. And the fact that he wasn't nearly in control as he'd like us to think he is.

And of course, my love, Mary was done sooooo beautifully. The scene where she is soaking up His blood while He is right underneath her...I just wanted to hold her.

I can't imagine anything better than this movie. It captured so many parts of the story perfectly.

I remember saying over and over in the theatre...I'm so sorry for any part I have in this...I'm so sorry for any part I have in this.

There is a crucifix in our church that is amazing.
He has glass eyes and a look of such deep sadness and pain...

I took my CCD kids to see it once and asked them if they knew why He looked so sad. Of course they said because He was hanging on a cross.

I told them no, He is not sad about that anymore. What makes Him sad now is that we are still crucifying Him over and over and all He wants to do is love us...but we don't understand and we keep hurting Him...

"I loved the portrayal of Satan. And the fact that he wasn't nearly in control as he'd like us to think he is."

yes, right on MK. I did enjoy it very much as well. When you have some time, rent "Jesus of Nazareth", it's quite a long movie and depicts the whole life of Jesus, very powerful scenes as well...

I'll try. I really love movies but I love them so much better on the big screen. I can't remember the last time I rented a movie...But I'll keep it in mind for next Lent...

I have GOT to go to bed...what a day.

I watched my son play in an Ultimate Frisbee competition today at the beach here in Chicago. 95 degree heat and the lake was closed due to E-coli. My nose is sooooo sunburned. Then I went to a block party. Got home at 9:30 only to get a call from my mother that my dad was "breathing funny" so I had to go back out. He's fine. His tongue had just kind of curled up in the back of his throat and he was actually suffocating himself.

We sat him up, pulled his tongue out and he was fine, but I am soooooo tired. Have to get up for early mass and then do my hour at the adoration chapel tomorrow.

Til then, Good night and God bless,
mk

ps my son lost all three games. Bummer. But I do love Ultimate Frisbee. It's the only team sport that women are as good as men. Plus it moves fast. Loads of fun!

Good Night MK,

hope you Dad is doing better (thats kind of scary)...Ultimate frisbie, umm never tried that. It's ok, sometimes losing games builds charater...

.. I cut grass and trimmed hedges all day.....

..don't forget the sunscreen!

MK,

I also love the Exorcist for how scary it was. Did you know it was based on a true story?
Not sure if I told you guys this story or not, but I go to SLU, and part of our history is the fact that our admissions/administration building used to be a hospital. The boy that was allegedly possessed stayed in the psychiatric ward and at our church while the Jesuits were working on the exorcism.
http://stlouis.about.com/cs/attractions/a/aa032203a.htm

That floor has been abandoned for a while, and is now about to be remodeled--I think they are going to put new offices there or something.

@ Mary & Heather4Life:
Thank you for your kind words. I understand that I'm not always the easiest person to get along with, and my personality and beliefs tend to clash with many of the people on this board, but while I may not have faith in a diety, I do believe in the perserverance of the human spirit, and I also believe in showing compassion where compassion is needed. I do miss my "uncle" [He was a really close family friend who was always an uncle to me], and I know the pain that comes with these kinds of accidents. I sympathize/empathize[?] with Dan's family and I'm fervently wishing for a full recovery.

@ MK:

"Do you do the same thing with books on Caligula, or Helen of Troy or even the history of your first love, Scotland. These stories also came from books, or from subjective interpretations about what kind of men and women these people were.

Can we just pick and choose which parts of a particular historical pictorial we believe or dismiss?

If you had said that you believe the whole thing was a myth, like Zeus or Pandora, I could see where you are coming from. But basically the only books we have on Jesus are the Gospels and the letters of the apostles. We have very few other sources to back them up or refute them.

Do you see?"

I understand what you're saying. I don't think the movie Braveheart is an accurate historical depiction of William Wallace because it was based off of a poem. I don't think Zeus, Thor, Odin, Poseidon, and many other dieties existed, either. Beowulf probably was a real warrior, but he probably never fought a dragon or an ogre. It's all relative, in a sense. We write stories and poems about epic battles and courageous warriors/heroes, but because we want to write our praises on these individuals to the sky, we tend to exaggerate. My personal feeling is that the Bible [specifically the letters of the Apostles] did just that.

Understand where I'm coming from?

Dan,

Yes I do, but poetry and fiction are meant to take liberties.

The Gospels were written as truth. The people who write such poems don't intend for you to believe everything in them. They don't believe everything them themselves.

But the people who wrote the Gospels do believe every word that they wrote. And they expect their readers to believe also.

There are four accounts, by different people, and except for a few inconsequential details they back each other up and give identical accounts.

If four poems were written about William Wallace and they were the only records we had of his story, and every part of the story in one poem was backed up by the same part of the story in one or more of the other poems, wouldn't you tend to believe the parts that were reiterated?

It's not like all four of the writers were sitting in a room at the same time cross referencing. They didn't even necessarily know each other.

They all wrote from different perspectives and to different audiences. And yet their stories match up. Historical, archaeological findings also back up the retelling.

http://www.doesgodexist.org/Phamplets/TheRealJesusOfHistory/TheRealJesusOfHistory.html

You accept the description of Jesus as good, revolutionary, etc., which are actually the most subjective parts of the Gospels and yet reject the most factual (The crucifixion, the resurrection, the miracles) which are actually the most objective. Think about it. Would you do this with any other account.

In the poem about Wallace...would you accept the parts that say he was a hero, a leader and a man of courage but discount the events that show him to be thus. Yes, you say, he was very brave. But I don't believe he was actually ever in battle...

Do you see? That doesn't make sense.

Would you say that Hitler was an awful, egotistical, charismatic, anti-semitic leader, but deny the fact that he tortured and killed jews? Then what would you say made him all of these things.

You say Christ was charismatic. But you don't say which parts of the gospels you accept that allow you to believe this.

You say he was a revolutionary, yet you don't say what parts of the gospel you accept that portray him as trying to change the world.

You say he was a liberal. And yet, which parts of the gospel do you accept that show him being compassionate.

And if you accept these parts, why do you suddenly reject the recounting of the miracles, the crucifixion, the resurrection and the fact that He did it all because He loved you?

Again, you accept the subjective parts and reject the objective parts. Seems inconsistent to me.

Zeke,
Great point!!!!
Posted by: Rosie at July 7, 2007 12:31 PM

Everyone, say hi to Rosie. She is a friend of mine from the blog I used to post on, Generation for Life. John Jansen sometimes posts on here. He runs that blog.

I've been asking Rosie to join us for some time now, and *yeah!!!* here she is.

Hi Rosie. Welcome!

Hey Rosie. Welcome!!

Good morning, MK. What's up?

Hey Alyssa,

Are you still there?

Had to drive my son to the Fire Dept. He goes on "ride-alongs". Wants to be a fireman.

Then I'll be off to mass. I'm hoping to go and see son number three in the frisbee finals today, but can't seem to find anyone willing to sit in 95 degree heat with me.

How 'bout you?

SH Dan,

You're entirely welcome.

I am just fascinated by history, and since I do not get into religious debates, I'll just address the historical issues you raise.
You're right, we, and I mean all cultures and people, do tend to pick and choose those aspects of history we like and we also tend to highly romanticize people, places, and eras. We have all kinds of Victorian scenes on Christmas cards and cookie tins. Life however was very difficult and the majority of people in that era were just struggling to survive.
Discoveries in North America are about to turn history and political correctness on its collective ear as well. There is anthropological and archeological evidence that the Native Americans as we know them today were not the first and only people in North America, but rather people had arrived here from the Pacific rim, other parts of Asia, and Europe by boat prior to or at the same time the ancestors of Native Americans were thought to have crossed the land bridge from Asia. Far from being any Garden of Eden, as early Native American life has been very inaccurately portrayed, all these people struggled for dominance and survival and were eventually either wiped out or genetically assimilated, forming tribes for survival. East coast Indians were found to have ancient European DNA, which shocked scientists. I have no idea how you distinguish ancient and modern DNA, I just saw this on the Discovery Channel.
Like you point out Dan, historical "fact" is always changing and is subjective. People perceive and believe what they want. While archeology and anthropology has confirmed much of what the bible says, it has also raised serious questions as to exactly what happened and why. I respect everyone's religious beliefs and lack thereof, I think we should all just keep an open mind when it comes to historical accuracy, religous or otherwise.

Hi Rosie!!

Hi Lyssie,

Its good to see you back.

It's so quiet around here today!

"Would you say that Hitler was an awful, egotistical, charismatic, anti-semitic leader, but deny the fact that he tortured and killed jews? Then what would you say made him all of these things."

Hmmm... I wouldn't deny anything about Hitler. He was a horrible man. He knew how to work a crowd and how to tell them what they wanted to hear, which made him a very good manipulator, but I would never deny anything he's done.

I'm not just accepting the subjective and rejecting the objective. However, I never said I don't believe in Jesus. It's mainly the "miracles" and his supposed heritage as the son of a diety. MK, do you believe in Heracles and Achilles as well?

Hi Mary,

there is a distinct variation in what truth means ... even current historical-truth. Truth that coincides with anthropological data is usually + 10,000 years old .... although over 95% of modern North American natives were killed by disease since Columbus' discovery in 1492 ... a little over 500 years ago. In the far reaches of human existence, these DNA findings have found a bottleneck where it seems our species was once reduced to about 12 survivors in ancient Africa. From this 12 all humans now existing seem to be descendants ... time line (I do not know.)

In these terms, much of biblical history ... the story of Adam; Noah's Arc to the Acts of the Apostles cover a time period 5000-3500BC until @150AD. These centuries and millennia saw some huge changes ... the agricultural revolution [was the story about Joseph in Egypt about this?] ... the beginnings of written language ... in India - Sanskrit; in Egypt - hieroglyphics and in China another (common for diverse sounding cultures) a written script that was more representative of mini-pictures than any Western written text (based on sound).

This time period, human names shifted from one [most people of biblical text have only one name ... in Rome emperors often have two names ... Rome's founders Romulus and Remus have just a single name.] ... to two - a family last name .... most often, we have again shifted - this time to three (what is called a middle name).

At this same time a small group of people (outcasts, later to be known as Abraham's children) formed into a nation ... in the ancient world they had a very different understanding of God and the God-man relationship. ('God in Search of Man' Abraham Heschel)

There is little doubt that Jesus not only emphasized this, but He expanded this a great deal.

One of Jesus' disciples John, is acutely aware of the human need and seeking for truth. John purposely shifts this and calls Jesus, Truth ... with a capitol 'T'. [To this day, many reject such an assertion.]

In the spiritual life this means that there is no more need to harbor truth, but that Truth calls us to life and joy, and peace, and love ... But this is not at all simple especially attempting to reconcile historic-DNA-concepts of truth with a living being, Truth. I guess we must choose!

Dan,

I understand that you believe that Jesus "lived". But if your "source" is the new testament (as there are very few other sources) and you accept this bit of information, even going so far as to accept personality traits about Him, my question is, why then do you reject the rest?

Why do you pick and choose? What is your criteria for what is acceptable to believe and what is unacceptable?

As to whether I believe in Achilles or Hercules, no I don't. These gods were made up to explain the unexplainable. But no one ever claimed that they met them, talked to them or ate dinner with them. Nobody believes in them.

But Christianity is part of a six thousand year old religion, and encompasses the entire world. Not just one country. The man lived. The man died. This we know. And new believers are added every day. It shows no sign of weakening and gets stronger with each passing year.

Not so Greek or Roman Mythology. Do you believe in them?

Speaking of truth John,

Many people want to know why the church doesn't get with the times.

What they aren't grasping is that Truth cannot change. It is what it is.

Since Jesus is (not has or represents, but is) the Truth, He cannot change. As a representative of Him, the church, which "holds" the Truth cannot change either.

The minute that the church "changes", she ceases to contain the Truth and there would no longer be a need for her.

The Truth must be safeguarded at all costs. To do anything else would be to endanger the well-being of the entire world, as nothing would be left except each man's fancy.

"Why do you pick and choose? What is your criteria for what is acceptable to believe and what is unacceptable?

[Achilles, Zeus, etc] These gods were made up to explain the unexplainable. But no one ever claimed that they met them, talked to them or ate dinner with them. Nobody believes in them."

I'm not picking and choosing when it comes to Jesus of Nazareth. I believe he lived and died, and I believed he martyred himself for the human race because HE believed it would save humanity from eternal damnation. However, I don't believe that he's the son of God, nor do I believe his lot of miracles. Like it was said in Braveheart and the Scotichronicon [the poem based on Wallace]: "William Wallace is seven feet tall!
Yes, I've heard. Kills men by the hundreds. And if HE were here, he'd consume the English with fireballs from his eyes, and bolts of lightning from his arse"

Who is to say that someone couldn't say that Jesus calmed a raging tempest, walked on water, cured the blind and sick, and made two fish and five loaves of bread feed five thousand people?

Something just doesn't ring true in those stories, same with Wallace being able to do the things people say he does.

Hi MK,

maybe I take more of a man's slant ... Truth is quite capable of taking care of Himself (I need not worry about Him ... I need not worry at all ... His victory IS! My life in Him is the victory.

We often believe that He is re-crucified in us - spiritually true - but heavy guilt-trip. He also IS the resurrection. So, we can be transformed to be the loving creatures He made us to be ... God ain't finished with me, yet! [maybe, 'a big pest' may describe this disciple. I get it from my Master - THE ULTIMATE PEST, eh?]

Again,
A poem is not expected to be taken as literal truth.

But the eyewitness accouonts related to the Gospel writers are.

Why even believe that he was good. Why not believe the Jewish and Roman take on it. That He was so awful He had to be condemned to death.

And nobody was willing to die rather than deny that Wallace was 7 feet tall. Yet hundreds and thousands have died rather than deny that Christ was who he says he was. All of the apostles were put to death because they refused to back down on their claims that Jesus rose from the dead.

What threat did Jesus pose if He was just a "nice" guy. And why would He consistentl do things that He knew would put His life in jeopardy if He didn't believe Himself to be who others claimed He was? He could have been a nice guy without making any waves.

And you are picking and choosing. You believe He was crucified, but not resurrected. You believe He had tons of followers, but not that He did the very things that made those people follow Him.

You say: HE believed it would save humanity from eternal damnation.

So was He nuts? Deluded? Insane? A liar? Were all of His followers just making things up? Don't you think that if He didn't do the things they claimed that He did, you'd have refutations? But nobody ever denied the stories. Even when He was being tried, nobody ever said that He claimed to do miracles but so and so claims he didn't. NOBODY refuted that part. The reason He had to die was because the claims were true. And they threatened the status quo.

John,

Truth is quite capable of taking care of Himself (I need not worry about Him ...

When I say safeguarded, I mean as in not changing the "rules" of the Church that have been put there by Truth itself...ie: The church suddenly saying that the Ten Commandments don't matter anymore. Or now saying that Jesus wasn't divine after all.

This is the problem with Catholic politicians. They sell out, change their truths and effect the way others see the Truth. Calling them on their lies is a way of safeguarding the "Truth", I believe. Never meant to imply that without us the Truth might fall apart.

Touche', MK, touche'.

However, I stand by my thoughts on the matter. The information is appreciated, but it's starting to get into the realm of the politics of Christianity and I would rather not get into that discussion. I do like talking to you and would rather not risk offending you with some of my views on this matter.

However, you do raise some very good points in the matter, but you do forget that many Scots died believing in Wallace's and later Robert the Bruce's cause for freedom from English tyranny. It is entirely possible that the same holds true for followers of Jesus. Once again, though, this requires me to go out and a do a bit more reading.

PS Go out and look up Revolutionist Christianity. It's something that's been holding my attention for a while and I think you'd be very interested in it.

Dan,

I'll respect your wishes for a truce...for now. But I must add that while many died for the Scottish cause, none died defending his height!

I'll check into RC. Thanks.

right you are MK,

... you'd make a fine seminary prof ...

its not the 'power' of Jesus that impresses me ... but His miracles are always a response to a human need ... from the miracle of water into wine at Canaan -- didn't want the party to end (Does He ever?) ... to the calming of the water & the walking on water -- the disciples were very scared ... to the feeding the multitude -- they was hungry after listening to Him ... to raising Lazarus --- folks were terrified of death ... on & on.

Wow MK!

Got a little time on your hands?

"As to whether I believe in Achilles or Hercules, no I don't. These gods were made up to explain the unexplainable."

I'm really not trying to nitpick (or maybe I am?), but....

Hercules was a demi-god (son of Zeus, and a human woman whose name I cannot remember). While I could be wrong, I don't think that any of his deeds were to explain the unexplainable.

As for Achilles, I think that he was supposed to be a mere mortal whose mother submerged him into the river Styx so as to make him invincible, or something to that effect.

It's been a while since I've read up on Greek mythology (which I happen to love almost as much as I love Egyptian mythology), so I may not be entirely correct.

Heather- Alcymne was his mother ;-)

I study that stuff.

Thank you, Erin :).

Now that I have the money and can use my debit card, it's time for me to refresh my memory on Greek and Egyptian mythology, and Arthurian lore.

(from the Greek 45; mythologa, from mythologein to relate myths, from mythos, meaning a narrative, and logos, meaning speech or argument) literally means the (oral) retelling of myths stories that a particular culture believes to be true and that use the supernatural to interpret natural events and to explain the nature of the universe and humanity.
Wikipedia

A. A myth is a story containing within and having about it certain identifiable characteristics. These are, specifically, that:

* It is a religious story — no matter from which culture — and will therefore involve the existence and activities of a supernatural being, such as a god, a demigod, a goddess, or several such entities;
* It will seek to explain at least some aspect of the origin or manner of things (where people came from, how rainbows first came to be, why whales have blow spouts, why people and animals feel hunger) if not of the very universe itself;
* It is not an isolated tale but connects up in some significant way with other similar stories within a culture, involving other deities who collectively form a pantheon;
* Its authorship is communally shared, that is, attributable to no single person, and it came into existence through oral tradition, and therefore usually has more than one version;
* It is believed to be essentially true by those in the society for whom it is one part of a cultural mythology.

From Peter Kohler

MK,

I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at.

From what I recall, the stories of Hercules and Achilles don't attempt to explain the "how" or "why" of things. They're just...hero tales.

Just to be sure, though, I'm going to dig up some books I haven't read in a while :).

Even if I'm wrong, well...it's a good excuse to refresh my memory.

" It is a religious story — no matter from which culture "

Like the bible.

Heather,

I'm not disputing what myths are. I'm saying that myths were used to explain the world around the people of the time. They were these peoples religion. They believed that these Gods existed.

My point with Dan is that nobody believes them now. There is nothing to back them up and never was.

With Jesus, it's different. Dan admits to believing that Christ existed. I'm just pointing out that the reason he believes Jesus existed is that he read it in the bible, a book he says he doesn't believe in.

Not every mythological creature was used to explain a natural occurence but many were. Many of them are the constellations. Some were nature worship.

I'm no expert. I certainly didn't mean to start a fight about what mythology is or isn't.

Cameron.

Yes, just like the bible. Except that the bible was written down by four sources explaining things that were eye witnessed and many times verifiable.

Mythology wasn't.

MK,

I was just confused as to what you were getting at. No hard feelings.

Like I said, at least this gave me a reason (aside from boredom) to read up on the stuff again :).

MK

You seem to be disputing Heather's qualification of your glib accusation that Hercules and Achilles are gods used to explain things. They are not. Hercules and Achilles do not explain anything and are not gods, no matter what deffinition of myth you employ.

Oh, I'd like to correct something I said earlier.

Both Hercules and Achilles are demi-gods, not just Hercules.

Cameron,

Are you smarter than a 5th grader?

All of the characters in mythology are gods or demi gods. It was their RELIGION! Every character had to have at least one parent that was a god. One could be mortal, but one had to be a god.

Heather,

That's fine. Like I said, I wasn't claiming to know anything about mythology. Dan brought up a poem about Wallace and Scotland and I was pointing out that some things were written with the understanding that they were fiction (poetry, plays, etc.) While some were meant to be taken as fact (mythology)

Demi-god, full god, never even crossed my mind that someone would get technical. Just goes to show you what happens when you take shortcuts...

Is Moses a demi god?

Argh.

To correct myself again....

Achilles was the son of Peleus and Thetis (a sea nymph).

Minor detail that probably doesn't matter too terribly much, but it would bother me otherwise.

"never even crossed my mind that someone would get technical."

LOL. You have to understand, I have been fascinated by this stuff since I was first introduced to it in my 5th grade English class :P.

That's cool Heather.
If mythology is something you enjoy then it would be important to you to get the technicalities correct.

Sorry if I misrepresented, unintentionally, something dear to you.

As you have seen, I can get just as picky when something Catholic get misrepresented. I'll just leave Zeus and Hermes to you...

Actually the angels are the demigod. Gabriel and such...

MK,

I love it so much I wanted to major in something related to it. The school I go to now, though, the closest I can get is just to major in Literature...and here it focuses mostly on British/American literature.

We have ONE mythology course that is supposed to be offered in the spring, but I've never even seen it listed.

Cameron,

You actually bring up an interesting topic. In the "Book of Enoch" which was dismissed as a fraud (pseudepigrapa) Enoch claims that during Adam and Eves time the fallen angels mated with human women and created a race called the nephilim. It is also supposed to be where the "giants" in the bible came from.

These fallen angels then proceeded to teach the women all the secrets of evil. There is even an angel that taught his "wife" about abortion...

And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto
them beautiful and comely daughters. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men
and beget us children.'

And all the others together with them took unto themselves wives, and each chose for himself one, and they began to go in unto them and to defile themselves with them, and they taught them charms
and enchantments, and the cutting of roots, and made them acquainted with plants. And they
became pregnant, and they bare great giants, whose height was three thousand ells: Who consumed
all the acquisitions of men. And when men could no longer sustain them, the giants turned against
them and devoured mankind. And they began to sin against birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and
fish, and to devour one another's flesh, and drink the blood. Then the earth laid accusation against the lawless ones.

...And the fifth was named Kasdeja: this is he who showed the children of men all the wicked smitings of spirits and demons, and the smitings of the embryo in the womb, that it may pass away

http://www.heaven.net.nz/writings/thebookofenoch.htm

MK,

Just curious (your last post reminded me, actually)....

Have you ever read the Time Quintet series by Madeleine L'Engle?

Heather,

Thank God for the internet and libraries. Don't let your college prevent you from pursuing something you want to learn about...do it on your own. Who knows, maybe one day you can teach the course!

Heather,

No. Is it good? What's it about?

MK,

"Thank God for the internet and libraries."

Seriously. While our courses are limited, thankfully the library is at least somewhat decent. And of course, there's always Amazon.com :).

"No. Is it good? What's it about?"

It's fantastic. I'll have to find a short summary of the series since I'm horrible at that, but the one I was reminded of was called Many Waters. Two of the characters get transported back to the time of Noah, and there are seraphim and nephilim involved.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Quartet

Just scroll down to the Overview section.

They're kind of children's books...but good nonetheless, and definitely worth reading.

They sound very science fictiony which I find hard to read, but I'll look next time I'm at Barnes and Noble. Always looking for good books to read to the kids at night.

Thanks.

You can find them really cheap at Wal-Mart, I'm sure. Here at least, they're less than $5 per book (paperback, but I prefer those anyway).

Thanks. I'm in walmart alot...unfortunately.

I'll talk again in the morning. I have to get up early for physical therapy. Thanks again.
G'nite!

Hmmm.... Enoch...

The Giants... reminiscent of the Titans.

Goodnight, MK.

As for myself...

I'm going to pop in a DVD (Hard Candy), load up the Sims 2, and pamper myself.

Goodnight, all!

I'm fond of the novel "Good Omens" by Terry Pratchet and Neil Gaiman myself.

Rae,

That's a fan-bloody-tastic book.

I've made all my friends read it. Even the ones who aren't fond of that style wound up loving it.

"The minute that the church "changes", she ceases to contain the Truth and there would no longer be a need for her."

"The Truth must be safeguarded at all costs. To do anything else would be to endanger the well-being of the entire world, as nothing would be left except each man's fancy."

MK, right on, as usuall....

..I do give SHDan credit for his interest in reseaching this topic, there are alot people his age who couldn't care less...

jasper, I second that!

Walmart, great store. I just bought myself a new coffee maker 2 days ago. It's the type that brews your coffee for you once you set it up. I had just gotten it out of the trunk, and *bang!* I dropped it. It's still working, but the seal on the pot cracked and the automatic brew isn't working either. Damn! I spent 50$ on the darn thing.

PS I meant to say that I bought it @ Walmart. Well, goodnight all!!!

"With Jesus, it's different. Dan admits to believing that Christ existed. I'm just pointing out that the reason he believes Jesus existed is that he read it in the bible, a book he says he doesn't believe in."

I just want to clarify that there is historical proof that there was a Jesus of Nazareth. I'm not disputing that. I'm disputing his status as a demi-god/son of God/lamb of God. That's the part that I don't buy. It's not like I'm saying there isn't a Jesus. I just believe that he wasn't someone with supernatural powers.

@ Jasper: My friend from Avon took me around to see all the places in Boston where they filmed The Departed, and I loved that movie as well. Plus, Erin's first concert in her life was the Dropkick Murphys in Chicago [I'm a huge fan of the band], and let me tell ya, you ain't seen nothing until you've seen them play I'm Shipping Up To Boston live on stage.

Considering our spats and all, I'm reluctant to say this, but I'll be in Boston the second week in August. Mayhaps we could meet up at Faneuil Hall sometime, grab a bowl of chowder, and have a nice, deep conversation, non?

@ HisMan:

"He would rather believe the lie that we evolved from monkeys when there is no evidence of such rather than believe that Jesus Christ is who He says He is when there is a mountain of evidence."

I believe in evolution as well, and not in the Creation story. Does that make me ignorant as well, to believe in science?

GOD'S WAY VS. MY WAY (BON JOVI AT LIVE EARTH CONCERT)

Over this past weekend I was watching some of the Live Earth concerts on TV. I was watching Jon Bon Jovi sing a few of my favorite songs. One of them was called “It’s My Life” in which Jon Bon Jovi stresses to do things “My Way”. This is a highly energetic song and I like the music in the song but disagree with the lyrics/message. The lyrics state we should be living our life “My Way”. Is this really true?

I believe we are really supposed to live life “God’s Way” and not “My Way”. This is why I always disagreed with Frank Sinatra’s song “My Way” also. I really like the music in Sinatra’s song but dislike the lyrics. I believe we are supposed to pray to God to find out how we are supposed to be leading our lives. If God asks us to give up all our possessions and follow him, then this is what we are called to do.

During the end of Bon Jovi’s Song “It’s My Life”, Jon Bon Jovi raises both his arms above his head and then does a rousing finish by moving his arms to his side and ends up finishing in the form of a cross. How ironic! Jon Bon Jovi sings a song about us doing things “Our Way” but then finishes his song in the form of the cross (God’s Way). It sends mixed messages to his audience. Which is it Jon? Christ died on the cross for our sins. We need to carry our own crosses each day.

When Abortion is used we our doing things “My Way” and not “God’s Way”. Through abortion we are not accepting God’s gift he has already gave us.

Most Americans currently use contraception although the tide seems to be slowly turning to Natural Family Planning. Contraception is not open to life nor God’s Will. Contraception is living life “My Way” not “God’s Way”. We need to always be open to God’s Way and God’s Gifts. We should therefore always be open to life.

Last, I am really a big fan of Bon Jovi and Frank Sinatra but I do believe they should change the lyrics in their songs to “God’s Way” and not “My Way”.

What are your thoughts?

Mike

Rae,

LOVED the The Good Omen. Loved playing Discworld on the PC too. Terry Pratchet is sooo odd.

All,
Yesterday on relevant radio someone called in and asked why God did the free will thing. Wouldn't it have been better to just make us love Him. Why set up a system where we are bound to fail?

After pointing out that this implies we are smarter than God and our way (wave to Mike) would be better, the host went on to say:

If you were madly in love with someone and they with you, how would you react if that person told you that they had been taking a drug the insured their love for you? Without it they wouldn't have the same feelings, but as long as they kept taking this drug, they would love you and treat you accordingly?

The same applies to our relationship with God. He doesn't want only our obedience. He wants us. ALL of us. If somebody loves us solely because they are taking a drug, then we have the outward signs of their love, but we don't really have them.

God wants our complete selves. He wants our freely given love, and He loves us so much that He was willing to take the chance that many of us would choose NOT to give Him that love.

Anyway, it was a new way of looking at freewill...and doing it His Way.

SH Dan, I think that's a great idea! Sorry for dipping. I'll bet you and jasper would get along great!

Oh-Oh Ladies,

The men are starting their own "breakfast club"...

THEY CAN'T DO THAT, MK!!! We have the rights to the breakfast club. They can have a tea party or kegger, but not a breakfast club. *stews in anger*

Well technically Dan suggested meeting for a bowl of chowder (which sounds suspiciously like oatmeal) so I think he means lunch...BUT STILL...

We had our club first.

And I'm not payin' for their fish n' chips...unless of course it's mullet.

*sigh*

They can do lunch.

But I'm being generous. (It's only allowed if I'm invited and SHDan is wearing a kilt. I mean, you know, because I'm a fan of "tradition".)

:D

Just joking, SH Dan. More power to you for the kilt thing, though....

*sigh*

My boyfriend is part French and doesn't know the rest of his heritage. No kilt boy for me...(although I'm not complaining, I love the kid.)

Myths DON'T always have to involve gods or demi-gods. A couple examples- the story of Pyrramus and Thisbe, story of Alcyone, the story of Hecuba. The purpose of myths isn't to inject divinity into everything- it's to provide explainations for things humans cannot understand or do not want to understand. It's the primary purpose of any religion.

Sheesh,

I can't win. When I say myths were man's way of explaining the unexplainable, Heather got upset.

When I said that all of the characters are gods or demi god because it is a religion, Erin gets upset.

Of course not every character is a god or demi-god. The gods and demi gods had to interact with humans.

I only said that to Cameron because he was claiming none of them were gods or demi gods. The heroes were PREDOMINANTLY gods or demi gods.

There, better?

In Greek mythology, Alcyone (Greek: Ἁλκυόνη) was the daughter of Aeolus, either by Enarete or Aegiale. She married Ceyx, son of Eosphorus, the Morning Star.

This �olus was perceived by later authors (i.e., after Homer) as a god, rather than as a mortal and simple Keeper of the Winds

So it appears that in some retellings Alycone was of the lineage of the gods.

Hecuba (also Hekabe Greek: Εκάβη) was a queen in Greek mythology, the wife of King Priam of Troy.
She was of Phrygian birth; her father was Dymas, and her mother (Euno�) was said to be a daughter of the god of the River Sangarius, the principal river of ancient Phrygia.

Hecuba's mother was a god. So she too had god "blood" in her.

The love story of Pyramus and Thisbe, not really a part of Roman mythology, is actually a sentimental romance.

I'm more about mythology than I ever wanted to...

Again,

* It is a religious story � no matter from which culture � and will therefore involve the existence and activities of a supernatural being, such as a god, a demigod, a goddess, or several such entities;
* It will seek to explain at least some aspect of the origin or manner of things (where people came from, how rainbows first came to be, why whales have blow spouts, why people and animals feel hunger) if not of the very universe itself;

*I'm learning more about mythology..."

All the above stuff came from wikipedia...

Oy, MK, what's up? I'm still stewing here at college for another three weeks of my summer. *sigh* How was son no.3's Frisbee tourney yesterday?

Hey Alyssa,

Son no 3 aka Michael's games went better yesterday than the day before. I think his team came in 17 out of 24.

I love this sport. Nobody gets hurt, it moves fast...girls can play!

How bout you? Anything exciting goin' on? Got any complaints about my take on mythology? What a can of worms that was!

MK,

Loved playing Discworld on the PC too.

It's a PC game too!?!?

"The men are starting their own "breakfast club"..."

No, I'm not starting a breakfast club. New England Clam Chowder is by far the best as long as you eat it in New England, and hell, if Jasper wants to sit down with a few pints and talk, I'm not gonna protest at all [I'm Scottish and Irish. I loves me my Guinness!]. I do, however, not think I ever implied I was starting a breakfast club, so knock off the ruckus!

... Can you describe this "ruckus"?

Here's a good question for you, MK. Seeing as how we had a nice discussion on whether or not Jesus of Nazareth was real, etc, etc...

There's no mention of dinosaurs in the Bible, yet we have evidence they existed. Do you think it was all faked, seeing as how dinosaurs didn't live in the Garden of Eden, nor were they "saved" when Noah built the ark to survive the great flood, or do you acknowledge their existence?

Well Dan,

As I'm Catholic and not a fundamentalist or a follower of Sola Scriptura I by no means believe that if it isn't in the bible then it cain't be so...

As I've pointed out before, God didn't say nuthin' 'bout murderin' midgets, but we can assume He still loves midgets and that they are as exempt from murder as the next guy.

If bones was found then bones they be...

Sola scriptura may be contrasted with Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox teaching, in which the Bible must be interpreted by church teaching, by considering the Bible in the context of Sacred Tradition.(as well as taking it historically sometimes while at others taking it "poetically".)

Sola scriptura may be contrasted with "prima scriptura," which holds that even though the Bible is the primary source of doctrine it is improved by reference to other sources. Also "Solo Verbo Dei," (by the Word of God alone), which is the Catholic position,[citation needed] contrasts sola scriptura, as Catholics consider that the Word of God is formed by Scripture and Tradition and when they refer to the "Word of God" it is not only to Scripture that they are referring as some other Christian groups might.
We don't accept sola scriptura because we believe that the Church created scripture and not the other way around.

The Church is the final say in all matters theological, not scripture. Scripture is only one source.

This is not to say that all non catholics only believe it if it's in scripture. My understanding is they only believe theological things if they are in scripture. Dinosaurs wouldn't count no matter which tradition you followed.
wikipedia

Skinhead Dan,

Here's a good link to ask questions on the bible...

http://www.ewtn.com/vexperts/conference.htm

Mike

Heather B.,
I believe there were four Disc World games. Unfortunately I was playing them around the time you were 8 and they no longer work on the newer computers. It came out in 1995. Loved 'em tho, and wish they'd come back!

MK,

Oh, that makes me sad. Just a few summers ago, my uncle introduced me to the wonderful series (he was also the one to send me Good Omens for Christmas).

I want to play the gaaaaaaaaames.

Yes,
I miss little Rincewind...that and monkey island.

Hey, MK, I absolutely love LOVE LOVE mythology. I'm more of a fan of Egyptian mythology, myself. Although Greek and Roman are very, very cool. I'd rather not get involved with the discussion as my expertise lies more with Egyptian, and you were primarily talking of Christian/Greek mythology.

SH Dan, 3:29p, asked: "There's no mention of dinosaurs in the Bible, yet we have evidence they existed. Do you think it was all faked, seeing as how dinosaurs didn't live in the Garden of Eden, nor were they 'saved' when Noah built the ark to survive the great flood, or do you acknowledge their existence?"

Ahoy, there, Protestant to the rescue!

Dinosaur-like creatures are mentioned in the Bible.

The Bible uses ancient names like "behemoth," which means "kingly, gigantic beasts," and "tannin," a term that includes dragon-like animals and great sea creatures like whales, giant squids, and plesiosaurs.

The Bible's best description of a dinosaur-like animal is in Job 40:15-19. Job is the oldest book in the Bible.

Look at the behemoth, which I made along with you and which feeds on grass like an ox. What strength he has in his loins, what power in the muscles of his belly! His tail sways like a cedar, the sinews of his thighs are close-knit. His bones are tubes of bronze, his limbs like rods of iron. He ranks first among the works of God."

(The cedar was one of the largest and most spectacular trees of the ancient world.)

SH Dan....about the ruckus....

We were just taken aback by you boys getting together for some vittles. (We're more jealous that you didn't invite us...lol).

But ruckuses are always fun. I'm sure MK would start one if you'd like. She's like the group caretaker/referee.

I may lack me a plentitude of Gaelic blood....but I got me some German and "Southern UK" in me (although there is a possibility of Scottish from my mom). I'm pretty feisty. Ruckus it will be.

Question, then...Jill, why weren't the dinosaurs included on the Ark? Didn't God command Noah to place a pair of EVERY animal on the boat (except, of course, the seafaring animals). Is there a reason God left out the "behemoths"? (...just because the boat wasn't big enough isn't gonna cut it.) Lol.

The Bible's best description of a dinosaur-like animal is in Job 40:15-19. Job is the oldest book in the Bible.

Look at the behemoth, which I made along with you and which feeds on grass like an ox. What strength he has in his loins, what power in the muscles of his belly! His tail sways like a cedar, the sinews of his thighs are close-knit. His bones are tubes of bronze, his limbs like rods of iron. He ranks first among the works of God."

@ Jill Stanek:

While you're on the right track, that passage is not about the dinosaurs. Read closer, and you'll find that they are in fact referring to crocodiles... Good try, but foiled, unfortunately.

I'm a big fan of both herpetology and paleontology, and it's references throughout the ages.

I guess this just proves the point I was trying to make in my post concerning history, anthropology, archeology, and DNA. How we all view history and writings from the past through our own racial, cultural, and religious prisms.
Jill interprets a biblical passage one way, SH Dan another. In my lifetime I'm seeing so many historical "facts" turned on their ear and hearing facts that were conveniently left out since they didn't nicely fit into the historical perspective we chose to have. I've also seen political correctness stand in the way of accurately reporting historical fact, even totally distorting it.
This is why I urge an open mind and lots of research on all hisorical matters secular and religious.

"I'm more of a fan of Egyptian mythology, myself."

Love Egyptian mythology. My "expertise" though, lies with that of the Greeks.

"but I got me some German and "Southern UK" in me (although there is a possibility of Scottish from my mom)"

On my mother's side...English, Scottish, French, German, and Irish :D.

"Mayhaps we could meet up at Faneuil Hall sometime, grab a bowl of chowder, and have a nice, deep conversation, non?"

Sure Dan, if I'm not traveling that week, I'd be happy to....

Jasper,

It would be nice to talk and not be at each other's throats. My friend Joey always said I'm more Bostonian than Chicagoan, and I've done the cherry stones to prove it. Besides, we may have our differences, but we are not so different, you and I.

*clapping for jasper and SH Dan!!*

Lyssie,

If you live in the area, then you are more than welcome to track me down. Unfortunately, once I hit Southie, that might be a bit hard considering the large Irish population and my uncanny chameleon-like abilities to blend into a crowd. If you live in the Chicago area, well, get off your buns and look me up! We could have many conversations, yes yes yes.

I like conversation. It keeps me entertained.

Dan, I'm looking closer. I never saw a crocodile with a tail like a cedar. Explain.

Hahaha, SH Dan, I live in PA. *le sigh* But I am glad for the conversations on here. If I were to go to where you live, I have the uncanny ability to stand out in a crowd. Look for the bright blonde head. :)

Although I might be able to pass for Irish due to the God-awful pale skin.

My ex boyfriend lived in Erie PA. I used to commute every other weekend.

"Dan, I'm looking closer. I never saw a crocodile with a tail like a cedar. Explain."

Look at the region where the Bible was set. Indeginous to Africa and the Middle East? Nile Crocodiles, the world's second largest crocodilian, topped only by Crocodylus Porosus, or the saltwater crocodile, which have left remains for paleontologists to find in that region.

Also consider that crocodiles haven't changed since the Cretaceous Era, when the dinosaurs last reigned, and Deinosuchus [Supercroc] was thought to have gone extinct sometime during the early days of ancient civilization, and it is thought that it may have even gone extinct not in BC, but AD. Crazy stuff, my friend. Also, research croc physiology, and tell me what you see in it's tail. You'll be suprised.

Oh, no, Heather4life, I live in Eastern Pa...quite close to the Jersey border. Very very far from Erie/Pittsburgh.

"Hahaha, SH Dan, I live in PA. *le sigh* But I am glad for the conversations on here. If I were to go to where you live, I have the uncanny ability to stand out in a crowd. Look for the bright blonde head."

Good luck with that. About every female and her mother in St. Charles is bright blonde.

Don't worry, someday you shall meet me, and then I shall totally warp your fragile little mind with the awesome powers of my Scottish heritage.

I live in Ohio. It doesn't take me long to get to Erie.

whoa, lots of massachusetts-ians here, kinda creepy how many sites ive been running into lately with a bunch of people from MA

Haha, damn. SH Dan, I guess I'm just used to being the palest thing in the room. People usually look for the hair that is still florescent in the dark when they're looking for me at parties (yes, it's real...not from a bottle).

Fragile little mind? I beg your pardon, good sir. I have more than a little bit of feisty Fraulein in me. I'll not have your Scottish-ness talk sass to the German in me.

this doesnt have much to do with discussion at the moment, but its caused some nice discussion in the past so i figured id post it.

Its a guest column written by an OB/GYN in seattle, figure it may bring about a bit more discussion :)

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/323011_syndrome10.html

Ok guys, well, I'm out for a little while. I'm going to see Transformers with some buddies of mine, and then I'm coming back to my house to get ready for another day of detasseling and riding out this beautiful storm [which I'll add a link for the pics I'm taking when I get back]. Hope it's a good one for you guys! Talk to you in a while!

Have fun SH Dan!

"Fragile little mind? I beg your pardon, good sir. I have more than a little bit of feisty Fraulein in me. I'll not have your Scottish-ness talk sass to the German in me."

You haven't met me yet. Trust me, I'm an experience, and that's just being around me.

Transformers = Great SFX, but overrated.

Detasseling = hell

Insomnia = annoying

SH Dan,

So the movie isn't necessarily as fantastic as I have heard? That's disappointing.

Dan, re: crocodiles.

I see now what you did. In your zeal to cut and paste from your How to Prove the Bible Wrong handbook, you referred to the wrong Bible passage. I quoted Job 40:15-19, which indeed describes a land monster, dinosaur-like creature. Your rebuttal referrd to Job 41:1-34, which describes a sea monster, crocodile-like creature. Try again.

SH Dan, I am one to doubt your "overwhelming powers". *giggle*

Experience? From what I can see, you're just a year older than I. I'm ALMOST intimidated. *grins mischievously*

I, too, have to question his "overwhelming powers"....

"Besides, we may have our differences, but we are not so different, you and I."

Agreed, Dan... Honest intelligent debate is much better than fighting....

Whoops!

Nope, you're right. I did read the wrong passage. However, the passage you are referring to matches up more with a beast like an elephant or some sort of pachyderm. Not reptilian in nature.

@ Lyssie & Heather B: You don't want to tangle with us Scotsman. We're a funny breed, we are. Besides, we make the best lovers, and we wear kilts. We have powers that only pinto beans can dream of!

@ Heather B: The plot and action and SFX were good, but the whole shaking camera deal is becoming more annoying than anything else, and it ruined a lot of the fight scenes.

SH Dan, your faith in No God is amazing. Show me an elephant with a tail like a cedar tree.

And flirting with other girls so soon after Erin's gone? Big surprise.

SH Dan and Jill

On the subject of crocodiles and elephants. I saw an interesting documentary on the Discovery Channel how creatures such as dragons may have once existed and were not figments of people's imaginations as they have so long been thought to be. Almost every culture has accounts of these mystical, magical creatures, which may have had some basis in fact as these creatures may well have been holdovers from the dinosaur age and did eventually die out. We still have crocs who are holdovers, so who is to say other creatures didn't survive and eventually die out at a much later time? They certainly were not magical or mystical, but undoubtedly would have been awe-inspiring and very frightening.
This is just an example of how myths and legends can be created around an event or an existing entity, be it human or non-human, often making it difficult to seperate fact from fiction. Concerning the biblical descriptions, SH Dan and Jill look at the same passages from different perspectives and come up with two entirely different interpretations. Jill sees it as biblical confirmation that dinosaurs existed along with man, SH Dan sees it as a description of an elephant. The prism through which we look does greatly influence what we perceive.

But all prisms produce rainbows if you let the sunshine through...

Will you calm down, Jill? Honestly, if you haven't noticed, a lot of playful banter is being thrown around between SH Dan and others, including MK. But then again, you wouldn't consider that "immoral" because it's because MK is involved (I mean no disrespect, MK).

I wanna know why, based on your "big surprise" sarcastic remark, that you would think SH Dan is more capable of "flirting" than any of your pro-lifers. Is it because he's a pro-choicer that you would automatically believe him capable of 'immoral' things? Why is it that you needed to say "big surprise"? What has SH Dan done to convince you that he's any more "distasteful" to "prove" to you through playful remarks that he's an unsavory character?

(Believe me SH Dan, you are very well respected by me. I won't engage you in any joking around anymore because Jill might accuse you of trying to "cheat" on Erin. Erin, you got a good one there. )

:)

I'm not excited, Lyssie. Stop with the patronizing. It's unbecoming a young feminist.

Dan knows what I'm talking about.

SH Dan,

Aside from that, is it worth the money to go see? I'll probably take Darren (the boyfriend) to see it when I have the spare cash regardless, but....

Erin is gone?

"Flirting with other girls so soon after Erin's gone? Big surprise"

Ok Jill, now you've gone and hit below the belt.

A. Erin and I broke up because she went back to Georgia, we weren't going to do a long-distance relationship, and it wouldn't have been fair to her even if we did, considering what the world has to offer, so DON'T YOU EVER GET UP ON YOUR HIGH HORSE AND MAKE ME OUT TO BE A MALE CHAUVINIST LIKE THAT. You mess with the bull, you're gonna get the horns, or in this case, the croc and the teeth.

B. I know Lyssie has a boyfriend, and I'm not trying to steal her away or anything like that. Get your oh-so-clean mind out of the gutter.

C. Yeah, you know what? I can do whatever I want. Erin went back and found solace in the company of another man. That doesn't make her a harlot or anything else. She did something natural. I've gone out on a few dates since she left, and I've talked with plenty of women. Doesn't mean I'm trying to get them into my bed.

Seriously, grow up and get out of high school. Yeah, Erin's gone. Yes, it hurts. But am I dealing with it and moving on with my life? Yes, because that's what animals do. They adapt.

Yes, that's right. I said it. We're all animals, Jill. We're just apes with a higher level of brain function. Get down off the mountain, because you're no better than the rest of us. You eat, breathe, drink, speak, and fornicate. That doesn't make you any different from anyone else on this board.

Oh, and you know what? No, there aren't any elephants with a tail like a cedar. However, there are more large animals in the world, and considering the Glyptodon, I wouldn't be surprised if maybe the "behemoth" was a species of prehistoric mammal.

Dan, I've told you before I think a lot about you and Erin. My heart breaks for you both while at the same time you anger me. I consider you both, particularly you, utterly selfish.

You said, on May 23, "Personally, I believe that the experience we had with her being pregnant and the following abortion made us stronger and closer as a couple, and has renewed my faith in love."

I knew then this was nonsense. So quickly you've moved on. Young ladies, this is SH Dan. Beware. He'll do the same to you.

And Erin? Why in the world would she stick with a guy who couldn't handle reality, who buckled under pressure and didn't do the right thing by her, who okayed her killing their baby?

This is the "right" abortion in all its glory, everyone. Here it is. This is what Dan's admitted animal instinct to have ejaculations under illicit circumstances results in.

Wonderful, celebratory things, aren't they?