Nebraska woman sues all homosexuals

[psychoslice]

What a stupid *****.

 

[psychoslice]

What a stupid *****et !!

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I wonder if maybe this crazy lady is doing this in hopes she will get a huge pay off as well?
She's either beyond stupid for trying to take it upon herself to represent the divine, or, she is doing it for the attention.
Or, just maybe, she proves we never really did achieve that "enlightenment" us Westerners are so fond of thinking we achieved a few hundred years ago. Either way, I do believe this qualifies as the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What a stupid *****.

What a stupid *****et !!

*****, by definition, is female. *****et is redundant.
And, in my opinion, not strong enough.

 

[Kerr]

Yes. This is serious.

Nebraska Woman Files Suit Against ALL Homosexuals - NBC News

I'm not sure she understands how these things work... or does that mean I can sue her for being a jerk? You know, even if I don't live in America?

EDIT:

Interestingly enough I'm not upset. It just seems to absurd to have any emotional reaction other then "wtf?".

 

[Marisa]

You do realize that's Judaism, not Christianity, right?

Leviticus 11 deals with clean and unclean food:
9 “‘Of all the creatures living in the water of the seas and the streams you may eat any that have fins and scales.10 But all creatures in the seas or streams that do not have fins and scales—whether among all the swarming things or among all the other living creatures in the water—you are to regard as unclean.11 And since you are to regard them as unclean, you must not eat their meat; you must regard their carcasses as unclean.12 Anything living in the water that does not have fins and scales is to be regarded as unclean by you.

Leviticus 18 deals with unlawful sexual relations:
22 “‘Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.

Christians often dismiss the laws of Leviticus as being OT, and applying only to Jews. But mercy me, how they do cling to Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. The OT also contains the 10 commandments, the story of Adam and Eve, Exodus, and Noah. Christians don't dismiss them as "judaism", either.

 

[Marisa]

*****, by definition, is female. *****et is redundant.
And, in my opinion, not strong enough.

If we're going for a French twist on it, it should be "*****ette".

 

[Marisa]

I'm not sure she understands how these things work... or does that mean I can sue her for being a jerk? You know, even if I don't live in America?

EDIT:

Interestingly enough I'm not upset. It just seems to absurd to have any emotional reaction other then "wtf?".

I'll file for you. When I read this article first on my facebook, I laughed so hard my head fell forward and slammed into my desk. I sustained a large goose egg, and had a headache so bad I couldn't work.

 

[thau]

How is any of that "anti-Chrstian"? Is it simply because they would rather use archeological & third-party(that is, non-Christian) sources regarding the Nazarene? You're going to have to simply accept that not everyone believes in your God and his son/himself made flesh/or however you view the Jesus-YHWH-Holy Spirit and how they relate to each other. Scholarly interest is not anti-Christian because they are wary of using the Bible as an infallible source. One must remember that the New Testament was written quite a time after the son of Mary & Joseph(along with most if not all of his disciples) had died.

So how did the massive swathes of the world that had either no or extremely limited contact with Judaism or Christianity turn out just fine? China, Japan, the Mongols, the myriad of Indian(subcontinent India) societies & kingdoms, South-East Asian cultures, sub-Saharan Africa and so on.

In fact, I would argue that Christianity tends to destroy cultures. Look at the pre-conversion Germanics(Norse/Vikings, Saxons, ect). They were vibrant cosmopolitan societies, with rich cultural history & religions. But when the Christians(having already turned Rome into a mere shadow of its former self) set off to the North with a Bible in one hand and a torch in the other they nigh-entirely destroyed them. They burned down our Oaks, they desecrated our Halls, they robbed us of our freedom. Before your God came from some eastern desert, our wives, daughters & sisters were not merely property of their menfolk be it husband, father or brother. You brought to this people, who had loved life, who lived not just for themselves but to bring honour to their kin & to make their ancestors proud. A people with Gods who did not treat us like inferiors, but as kin. Who did not worship their Gods so much as they praised them, without fear & without promise of reward.

These peoples, my people, were doing just fine without your Christ and your notions of shame, your notions that people are somehow born inherently broken.

Please do not try to compare the socio-political world of today to something that has been gone for over a thousand years. You painfully over-simplify why Rome fell, and it was not because of their "decadence". One can pin the collapse of Rome in part on Christianity itself. It utterly destroyed the religious & ethnic tolerance that made Rome so powerful. Making such an analogy does nothing but outline your ignorance(in the traditional sense of the word, as in simply being unaware) regarding history at large.

I am going to concede your position only because I cannot defend mine without sound research which takes time I do not have. However my suspicions are that you are very much overstating the brutish side of Christian ventures or missions and understating its benefits. Is it merely a coincidence the most developed and charitable nations are Christian? Which nations care for those countries in most need the most? Maybe if we all remained as cavemen or aborigines there would be less war but I doubt that is the optimum solution for this planet.

I suppose until one accepts or believes that Jesus Christ is the savior of mankind and the faith He established has a message for the world far beyond a good standard of living, until one goes that far they most likely will reject the positive and play up the negative at a secular level or a temporal level. But like I said, I cannot refute your claims about our evils in the norseland or germany, I will have to relent for now.

Oh, yes. And PBS is indubitably anti-Christian in its religious programming as well as its historical programming on religious characters. Their whole mission is to cast doubt on any Christian claim or teaching --- very often with the most dubious or unlikely alternative scenarios. (perhaps that can be expounded on at a later date as well)

 

[Deidre]

I'm not sure she understands how these things work... or does that mean I can sue her for being a jerk? You know, even if I don't live in America?

EDIT:

Interestingly enough I'm not upset. It just seems to absurd to have any emotional reaction other then "wtf?".

You can sue for any reason at all. Just make sure that it’s news worthy, and I’ll be sure to start a thread about it here. Hehe

 

[BSM1]

You do realize that's Judaism, not Christianity, right?

Do you realize that the admonition against a man laying with another man is also in the same book in the Old Testament as the dietary sins. I don't think you'll find a direct reference to homosexuality in the New Testament. Thus, my snide observation concerning seafood. Christians seem to enjoy selective righteous indignation.

 

[Wirey]

Do you realize that the admonition against a man laying with another man is also in the same book in the Old Testament as the dietary sins. I don't think you'll find a direct reference to homosexuality in the New Testament. Thus, my snide observation concerning seafood. Christians seem to enjoy selective righteous indignation.

Testify!

 

[Nietzsche]

I am going to concede your position only because I cannot defend mine without sound research which takes time I do not have. However my suspicions are that you are very much overstating the brutish side of Christian ventures or missions and understating its benefits. Is it merely a coincidence the most developed and charitable nations are Christian? Which nations care for those countries in most need the most? Maybe if we all remained as cavemen or aborigines there would be less war but I doubt that is the optimum solution for this planet.

Burma(or if you really want, Myanmar), a Theravada Buddhist country, & the United States are tied for most-charitable. Rest of the top-10 list;

Canada(Heavily secular)
Ireland(Christian, largely devout)
New Zealand(Heavily secular)
Australia(Heavily secular)
Malaysia(Muslim)
UK(Heavily secular)
Sri Lanka(Buddhist)
Trinidad & Tobago (Christian plurality at 54%, Hindus 18%, 11% Unspecified, 8% Other, 5% Muslims)

Here's the article & list down to 20.

Once you dip down below 10, you start seeing a lot of Muslim(including Iran) & Buddhist states, and then you also see extremely secular ones(Denmark, Netherlands & Iceland).

That's a reasonably even distribution, I'd say, even more so when you look at the religious demographics of the top 10.

I suppose until one accepts or believes that Jesus Christ is the savior of mankind and the faith He established has a message for the world far beyond a good standard of living, until one goes that far they most likely will reject the positive and play up the negative at a secular level or a temporal level. But like I said, I cannot refute your claims about our evils in the norseland or germany, I will have to relent for now.

The Oak Trees had naught to do with their physical worth, they were where the Germanics(those who deigned to, anyway) would celebrate our Gods. There were undoubtedly missionaries sent to the North with the best intentions, to teach the people about their God & his son and allow for them to convert in their own time. But it became extremely clear that was never going to be enough to supplant the Aesir & Vanir. It was an alien faith, one entirely at odds with their way of life & their own morality. Namely the notion that we are somehow broken, or that we would rewarded or punished based on faith rather than actions.

Which is why they were some of the first to be converted by the sword. And even then, the Germanic peoples resisted conversion for centuries, longer than any other group. You can even see the echoes of this today. As soon as it became tenable(as in Christians south of them wouldn't just invade again, so the past few hundred years) they've been dropping Christianity en masse, and rapidly.

Oh, yes. And PBS is indubitably anti-Christian in its religious programming as well as its historical programming on religious characters. Their whole mission is to cast doubt on any Christian claim or teaching --- very often with the most dubious or unlikely alternative scenarios. (perhaps that can be expounded on at a later date as well)

Most PBS Documentaries I've seen on Jesus of Nazareth regard him as some manner of heretical rabbi(which in fairness would be true) who upset the wrong people and so they made example of him. Is that really "anti-Christian" or is it just non-Christian?

 

[Smart_Guy]

... dietary sins.

No more diet Pepsi for me

 

[Thana]

Do you realize that the admonition against a man laying with another man is also in the same book in the Old Testament as the dietary sins. I don't think you'll find a direct reference to homosexuality in the New Testament. Thus, my snide observation concerning seafood. Christians seem to enjoy selective righteous indignation.

Homosexuality is included in the umbrella term 'sexual immorality' which is mentioned numerous times in the NT.

I don't understand how people can be so ignorant and yet so outspoken?
They don't know what they're talking about but they keep talking anyway. It honestly boggles my mind.

Leviticus 11 deals with clean and unclean food:
9 “‘Of all the creatures living in the water of the seas and the streams you may eat any that have fins and scales.10 But all creatures in the seas or streams that do not have fins and scales—whether among all the swarming things or among all the other living creatures in the water—you are to regard as unclean.11 And since you are to regard them as unclean, you must not eat their meat; you must regard their carcasses as unclean.12 Anything living in the water that does not have fins and scales is to be regarded as unclean by you.

Leviticus 18 deals with unlawful sexual relations:
22 “‘Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable.

Christians often dismiss the laws of Leviticus as being OT, and applying only to Jews. But mercy me, how they do cling to Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. The OT also contains the 10 commandments, the story of Adam and Eve, Exodus, and Noah. Christians don't dismiss them as "judaism", either.

The Laws of Leviticus are Jewish laws, Specifically given to Jews and for Jews. Gentiles were never supposed to follow them, And we don't.
It's not dismissal, It's an entirely different religion.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

"Homosexuals"
"Their Given Name Homosexuals"
"Their, Alis[sic] Gay"

60 years on Earth. Would have guessed more like 10 or 11 from the above.

 

[Marisa]

Homosexuality is included in the umbrella term 'sexual immorality' which is mentioned numerous times in the NT.

I don't understand how people can be so ignorant and yet so outspoken?
They don't know what they're talking about but they keep talking anyway. It honestly boggles my mind.



The Laws of Leviticus are Jewish laws, Specifically given to Jews and for Jews. Gentiles were never supposed to follow them, And we don't.
It's not dismissal, It's an entirely different religion.

Yep, that's what I generally hear from (anti gay) christians, right after they've quoted Leviticus at me.

 

[Thana]

Yep, that's what I generally hear from (anti gay) christians, right after they've quoted Leviticus at me.

Well good thing I'm not anti-gay.
I'm just anti-ignorance.
Christianity itself isn't perfect, I know, But it's not Judaism and people should learn the difference if they want to debate.

 

[Marisa]

Well good thing I'm not anti-gay.
I'm just anti-ignorance.
Christianity itself isn't perfect, I know, But it's not Judaism and people should learn the difference if they want to debate.

I've no intention of debating about the relevance of what's in any book of the bible with you or anyone else. I'll just keep noticing that any given passage's importance to all xstians seems entirely dependent upon which axe a given xstian is currently grinding.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Cat fight cat fight

Edit:
Sorry, I just wanted to change the atmosphere. I suck at it, don't I?