(10-04-2017 02:14 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 02:10 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Foolishness as always from Tom. YHWH is their Judge, it has nothing to do with me other than my own grieving for those poor innocent children. Not only for the aborted babies, but all the children who have been caught up in the wickedness of the elites.

YHWH is YOUR judge, if you choose that. You don't have the right to impose Christian sharia law on those that don't agree with your faith.

Basically, you appear to want to punish women who have sex outside of your decisions for their bodies.

Now, what about health care for kids, family leave, and assistance for women who have babies they cannot afford without help from the STATE (especially those that aren't part of your religion).

And what about birth control? You good with that?

I didn't impose "christian law" on anyone. I didn't say anything about wanting to punish any woman for having sex, and I said nothing about not wanting kids to have healthcare. You don't even know what my thoughts are on children and healthcare.

You are just a blatant liar, plain and simple. And you just perfectly illustrated that.

You are making a fool of yourself with your angry, hate filled fantasies and accusations.

(10-04-2017 02:21 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 02:14 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 02:10 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Foolishness as always from Tom. YHWH is their Judge, it has nothing to do with me other than my own grieving for those poor innocent children. Not only for the aborted babies, but all the children who have been caught up in the wickedness of the elites.

YHWH is YOUR judge, if you choose that. You don't have the right to impose Christian sharia law on those that don't agree with your faith.

Basically, you appear to want to punish women who have sex outside of your decisions for their bodies.

Now, what about health care for kids, family leave, and assistance for women who have babies they cannot afford without help from the STATE (especially those that aren't part of your religion).

And what about birth control? You good with that?

I didn't impose "christian law" on anyone. I didn't say anything about wanting to punish any woman for having sex, and I said nothing about not wanting kids to have healthcare. You don't even know what my thoughts are on children and healthcare.

You are just a blatant liar, plain and simple. And you just perfectly illustrated that.

You are making a fool of yourself with your angry, hate filled fantasies and accusations.

Yes you most definitely impose your sharia on others, or at least you appear to be advocating just that. Period.

Your religious beliefs should have zero import on policy that impacts people who don't share your religious views.

Ok, how do you feel about the GOP attempts to cancel healthcare for kids? Do you support taxpayer subsidized birth control (we subsidize the **** out of Viagra btw)? Do you support sufficient taxpayer support for women caring for kids that aren't liked by the church?

(10-04-2017 01:55 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:52 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:44 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:38 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  This country is going to pay a heavy price for the open murder of million and millions of perfectly healthy unborn babies.

I have no doubt YHWH sees this no different that when the Canaanites and Amalekites were burning their children and newborns alive to moloch. The only thing withholding judgment now is the number of serious and devout Christians still in this country.

I suspect these sins go much deeper, and there is more child sacrifice and child molestation among the super rich elites than we are aware of.

Ah Yes, because its your job, as a man, to tell women what to do with their bodies.

No, just their baby's bodies.

Again, you carry a baby to term and then decide. Besides, the vast majority of "pro-lifers' could care less about the kid once its born. No healthcare. No welfare. No help to the parent. Nothing. Just a tax cut for the rich and another private jet for their pastor.

Its not 'pro-life' if you'll let the kid die because his mom can't afford healthcare. I'm sorry but this appears to me to be nothing more than some man trying to punish the woman for being sexually active.

And of course, 'pro-lifers' hate groups like Planned Parenthood, who distribute birth control so that the number of abortions are reduced.

Hey guys - what's y'all's position on birth control for women?

Okay, I'll just ignore all your nonsensical hyperbole before your last sentence and answer that one, since it was actually a question... (Shesh)

My position is.... USE IT!!! USE BIRTH CONTROL!!!!! ESPECIALLY YOU, TOM.

Freakin' A, what do you want? Use birth control. But I'll bet what you REALLY want us to say is "NO! Don't use birth control! Only have sex with your husband when you want to have a baby! So, no more than 2.5 times during your marriage should you have that evil nasty SEX!!!"

Of course I am in favor of women using birth control.
Now, what YOU want is for me to pay for my wife or girlfriend's birth control AND yours as well, right? No, I'm not in favor of that. You do you, and I'll do me.

(10-04-2017 02:33 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:55 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:52 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:44 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:38 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  This country is going to pay a heavy price for the open murder of million and millions of perfectly healthy unborn babies.

I have no doubt YHWH sees this no different that when the Canaanites and Amalekites were burning their children and newborns alive to moloch. The only thing withholding judgment now is the number of serious and devout Christians still in this country.

I suspect these sins go much deeper, and there is more child sacrifice and child molestation among the super rich elites than we are aware of.

Ah Yes, because its your job, as a man, to tell women what to do with their bodies.

No, just their baby's bodies.

Again, you carry a baby to term and then decide. Besides, the vast majority of "pro-lifers' could care less about the kid once its born. No healthcare. No welfare. No help to the parent. Nothing. Just a tax cut for the rich and another private jet for their pastor.

Its not 'pro-life' if you'll let the kid die because his mom can't afford healthcare. I'm sorry but this appears to me to be nothing more than some man trying to punish the woman for being sexually active.

And of course, 'pro-lifers' hate groups like Planned Parenthood, who distribute birth control so that the number of abortions are reduced.

Hey guys - what's y'all's position on birth control for women?

Okay, I'll just ignore all your nonsensical hyperbole before your last sentence and answer that one, since it was actually a question... (Shesh)

My position is.... USE IT!!! USE BIRTH CONTROL!!!!! ESPECIALLY YOU, TOM.

Freakin' A, what do you want? Use birth control. But I'll bet what you REALLY want us to say is "NO! Don't use birth control! Only have sex with your husband when you want to have a baby! So, no more than 2.5 times during your marriage should you have that evil nasty SEX!!!"

Of course I am in favor of women using birth control.
Now, what YOU want is for me to pay for my wife or girlfriend's birth control AND yours as well, right? No, I'm not in favor of that. You do you, and I'll do me.

is sex is the prerogative of the wealthy? Why do we pay to subsidize Viagra and not birth control?

What about a right to taxpayer provided healthcare for kids? How about taxpayer sustenance for women who have kids and can't afford them?

Taxpayer supported birth control prevents abortions.

(10-04-2017 02:37 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 02:33 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:55 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:52 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:44 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Ah Yes, because its your job, as a man, to tell women what to do with their bodies.

No, just their baby's bodies.

Again, you carry a baby to term and then decide. Besides, the vast majority of "pro-lifers' could care less about the kid once its born. No healthcare. No welfare. No help to the parent. Nothing. Just a tax cut for the rich and another private jet for their pastor.

Its not 'pro-life' if you'll let the kid die because his mom can't afford healthcare. I'm sorry but this appears to me to be nothing more than some man trying to punish the woman for being sexually active.

And of course, 'pro-lifers' hate groups like Planned Parenthood, who distribute birth control so that the number of abortions are reduced.

Hey guys - what's y'all's position on birth control for women?

Okay, I'll just ignore all your nonsensical hyperbole before your last sentence and answer that one, since it was actually a question... (Shesh)

My position is.... USE IT!!! USE BIRTH CONTROL!!!!! ESPECIALLY YOU, TOM.

Freakin' A, what do you want? Use birth control. But I'll bet what you REALLY want us to say is "NO! Don't use birth control! Only have sex with your husband when you want to have a baby! So, no more than 2.5 times during your marriage should you have that evil nasty SEX!!!"

Of course I am in favor of women using birth control.
Now, what YOU want is for me to pay for my wife or girlfriend's birth control AND yours as well, right? No, I'm not in favor of that. You do you, and I'll do me.

is sex is the prerogative of the wealthy? Why do we pay to subsidize Viagra and not birth control?

What about a right to taxpayer provided healthcare for kids? How about taxpayer sustenance for women who have kids and can't afford them?

Taxpayer supported birth control prevents abortions.

Uhhh... we should not subsidize Viagra. That's just stupid.

Oh, and stop saying "Taxpayer provided healthcare". We've had that since the 60s and before that. What you mean is "Taxpayer provided health insurance."

(10-04-2017 02:40 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 02:37 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 02:33 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:55 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:52 PM)geosnooker2000 Wrote:  No, just their baby's bodies.

Again, you carry a baby to term and then decide. Besides, the vast majority of "pro-lifers' could care less about the kid once its born. No healthcare. No welfare. No help to the parent. Nothing. Just a tax cut for the rich and another private jet for their pastor.

Its not 'pro-life' if you'll let the kid die because his mom can't afford healthcare. I'm sorry but this appears to me to be nothing more than some man trying to punish the woman for being sexually active.

And of course, 'pro-lifers' hate groups like Planned Parenthood, who distribute birth control so that the number of abortions are reduced.

Hey guys - what's y'all's position on birth control for women?

Okay, I'll just ignore all your nonsensical hyperbole before your last sentence and answer that one, since it was actually a question... (Shesh)

My position is.... USE IT!!! USE BIRTH CONTROL!!!!! ESPECIALLY YOU, TOM.

Freakin' A, what do you want? Use birth control. But I'll bet what you REALLY want us to say is "NO! Don't use birth control! Only have sex with your husband when you want to have a baby! So, no more than 2.5 times during your marriage should you have that evil nasty SEX!!!"

Of course I am in favor of women using birth control.
Now, what YOU want is for me to pay for my wife or girlfriend's birth control AND yours as well, right? No, I'm not in favor of that. You do you, and I'll do me.

is sex is the prerogative of the wealthy? Why do we pay to subsidize Viagra and not birth control?

What about a right to taxpayer provided healthcare for kids? How about taxpayer sustenance for women who have kids and can't afford them?

Taxpayer supported birth control prevents abortions.

Uhhh... we should not subsidize Viagra. That's just stupid.

And we do. Call me when that ends.

As my brother used to say, "Everybody I know is against abortion until it's their daughter who is pregnant." Applies to girlfriends too, I see.

(10-04-2017 01:55 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Hey guys - what's y'all's position on birth control for women?

they need to use it or keep their legs closed.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

(10-04-2017 01:38 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  This country is going to pay a heavy price for the open murder of million and millions of perfectly healthy unborn babies.

I have no doubt YHWH sees this no different that when the Canaanites and Amalekites were burning their children and newborns alive to moloch. The only thing withholding judgment now is the number of serious and devout Christians still in this country.

I suspect these sins go much deeper, and there is more child sacrifice and child molestation among the super rich elites than we are aware of.

this is where we go sideways....

it has everything to do with the ability to purvey....if one cannot, then they should not or abort.....

you, nor anyone else will convince me otherwise......

it's all about controlling the herd......and the subsidized herd is what is now on your heels......

capiche???

(10-04-2017 01:55 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Hey guys - what's y'all's position on birth control for women?

In favor of it. My wife uses it.

But I shouldn't be forced to pay for it for someone else because I was told we should keep government out of the bedroom and using tax money to buy birth control for women let's the camel get it's nose under the tent.

(10-04-2017 04:42 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  As my brother used to say, "Everybody I know is against abortion until it's their daughter who is pregnant." Applies to girlfriends too, I see.

funny how that works, eh???

if there's one thing I've learned about folk???? hypocrisy reigns supreme when they find the corner as the only option......

Murphy not seeking re-election.

(10-04-2017 08:17 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Murphy not seeking re-election.

Don't know why he did that. No Republicans care about Trump supporters with 100% religious right voting records engaging in bad/hypocritical behavior.

(10-05-2017 09:56 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 08:17 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Murphy not seeking re-election.

Don't know why he did that. No Republicans care about Trump supporters with 100% religious right voting records engaging in bad/hypocritical behavior.

Hillary Clinton openly supports abortion on demand, has clear disdain for religious freedom, and used her charity to launder money and sell influence while Secretary of State. Did you think the religious right was going to vote for her?

Why didn't a republican win the congressional seat in Mass after Barney Frank was busted having an underage male prostitution ring out of his house?

Because the district is a bunch of leftist that would rather have their agenda represented than throw out the person representing it.

(10-04-2017 01:38 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  This country is going to pay a heavy price for the open murder of million and millions of perfectly healthy unborn babies.

I have no doubt YHWH sees this no different that when the Canaanites and Amalekites were burning their children and newborns alive to moloch. The only thing withholding judgment now is the number of serious and devout Christians still in this country.

I suspect these sins go much deeper, and there is more child sacrifice and child molestation among the super rich elites than we are aware of.

I was with you right up until the last paragraph. For starters, it has little to do with the OP. This hypocritical SOB needs to lose his job.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

(10-04-2017 04:42 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  As my brother used to say, "Everybody I know is against abortion until it's their daughter who is pregnant." Applies to girlfriends too, I see.

Nope. If my daughter gets knocked up I hope she raises the child. I would help her to the best of my ability.

Sent from my SM-J700T using CSNbbs mobile app

(10-05-2017 10:06 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-05-2017 09:56 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 08:17 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Murphy not seeking re-election.

Don't know why he did that. No Republicans care about Trump supporters with 100% religious right voting records engaging in bad/hypocritical behavior.

Hillary Clinton openly supports abortion on demand, has clear disdain for religious freedom, and used her charity to launder money and sell influence while Secretary of State. Did you think the religious right was going to vote for her?

Why didn't a republican win the congressional seat in Mass after Barney Frank was busted having an underage male prostitution ring out of his house?

Because the district is a bunch of leftist that would rather have their agenda represented than throw out the person representing it.

Disdain for religious freedom? If that means disdain for the Mississippi law authorizing the denial of all healthcare for LGBT persons...well then yes. Or the support for denying people like my brother a hospice bed so he could have died with dignity, then yes, there's disdain. Or how about the case in Mississippi where a funeral home refused to honor pre arranged burial services when they found out the deceased was Gay? You got disdain for that? How about taking 90% of the TAXPAYER SUPPORTED social work jobs, 30% of the TAXPAYER SUPPORTED health care jobs, and 25% of education jobs and placing them off limits to LGBT persons? Do you disdain that?

HRC supports taxpayer funded mechanisms to reduce abortions, such as birth control on demand (remember we fund the **** out of Viagra) as well as a woman's right to decide for herself what to do with her body. The GOP is so pro-life that they're in the process of getting rid of health care for kids so they can give the top 0.00001% a trillion dollar tax cut.

Money laundering? Influence peddling? Really? The pro-lifers support Trump.

well he's decided to retire now. Do as I say, not as I do.

(10-04-2017 01:38 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  This country is going to pay a heavy price for the open murder of million and millions of perfectly healthy unborn babies.

I have no doubt YHWH sees this no different that when the Canaanites and Amalekites were burning their children and newborns alive to moloch. The only thing withholding judgment now is the number of serious and devout Christians still in this country.

I suspect these sins go much deeper, and there is more child sacrifice and child molestation among the super rich elites than we are aware of.

There is a lot of speculation that the Israelites practiced the same sacrificial rituals until more recent times where almost all the peoples in that region saw child sacrifice as morally repugnant. Then the laws were rewritten to allow humans to "opt out" by sacrificing an animal in place of the first born child. Funny that YHWH needed blood sacrifices just like all the other false gods in the region. One of those things that I have extreme difficulty reconciling to the rest of the faith.

(10-05-2017 11:58 AM)miko33 Wrote:  

(10-04-2017 01:38 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  This country is going to pay a heavy price for the open murder of million and millions of perfectly healthy unborn babies.

I have no doubt YHWH sees this no different that when the Canaanites and Amalekites were burning their children and newborns alive to moloch. The only thing withholding judgment now is the number of serious and devout Christians still in this country.

I suspect these sins go much deeper, and there is more child sacrifice and child molestation among the super rich elites than we are aware of.

There is a lot of speculation that the Israelites practiced the same sacrificial rituals until more recent times where almost all the peoples in that region saw child sacrifice as morally repugnant. Then the laws were rewritten to allow humans to "opt out" by sacrificing an animal in place of the first born child. Funny that YHWH needed blood sacrifices just like all the other false gods in the region. One of those things that I have extreme difficulty reconciling to the rest of the faith.

Its not speculation, the bible recorded many different instances throughout and after the Kingdom age were many of the people turned to the pagan gods and idols, and also sacrificed their children to them.

YHWH Himself declares in several of the OT prophets that Israel would be destroyed and scattered across the earth for these and other sins for many generations, and they were for almost 2000 years (70 AD until 1948 AD). They actually were already a conquered nation ever since Babylon.

The blood sacrifice of animals in the bible is connected directly to the sacrifice of Jesus Christ and the salvation of mankind, and the world murdering Him though He was innocent and the only begotten Son of YHWH.

That is what separates Christianity from all other religions. YHWH decreed blood as payment for sin, so HE Himself could enter the flesh as a man, actually humbling Himself to the flesh and death as a man, and be the blood sacrifice for all sin to Redeem man's fall.

He put the whole thing upon Himself.