billydee4

You mean that the "bad guys" in Iraq, whoever they may be, have no idea that we are doing so poorly? They are winning and have control over areas of the country but they don't know it? Petraeus is not going to give out troop locations and war plans. He is--or should--be giving a report on the state of this mistake Bush made. This administration keeps too many things secret and then lies about them. Why would anyone say that they will testify--which means "tell the truth"--as long as they are not under oath and there is no written record of what was said? They are trying to hide their f***-ups.

My apologies to Clarence.

Nice misdirection, bry, now try to rationalize the actual bible quotes, or do they just don't mean what they mean.

Hahahahahahahah. Gosh, patrat, you are such a wit. And a brilliant social commentarian. Your insight is stupendous. I was in a 4-H club, not the girl scouts. Care to address any of the ideas I brought up? I didn't think so.

Try Googling "dominionist", "restorationist", "take back america", Rod Parsley, D. James Kennedy, or Gary North. These searches will lead you to dozens of other sites encouraging their followers to change our government into a fundamentalist christian theocrazy.

I am not arguing that the Hebrew allows both translations but your insistence and the insistence of the NIV translators to say that your translation is the right one. The decision to use either the past or past-perfect in English was not done by a coin toss.

Just what exactly does victory look like? So far we have not done anything to prevent or end the civil war in Iraq. We are not fighting an army that wears Al-Quaeda emblems on their uniforms. It is hard for most Americans to find any differences between Sunni and Shia, between Al-Quaeda and non-Al-Quaeda. Even if we kill all of the Sunni or the Shia or Al-Quaeda the Middle East has millions more of each to replace them. Korea is different from Iraq because we are on a defensive footing and there has been very little conflict there in many years. Our occupation of Iraq would just be an open wound and we will keep wasting lives there for years.

You could also use the same sort of facts to prove that this is a white country. Most of the people in the US are white. Our money is printed and engraved with pictures of white people, the Supreme Court is currently made up of all white people. Millions of Nativity Scenes depict Jesus, Mary, & co. as white europeans. "White Christmas" goes without saying. It was written and sung by white people. All of the presidents have been white, the Speaker of the House is white and associates often with white people. Also, white people wrote our constitution, the majority of our elected officials have been white, and I could go on. All of these facts do not make this country a white country to the elimination of all others. Our laws now are racially-neutral, even though our behavior and our application of the laws is not. Our laws are also religiously-neutral although their application is not.

Buttwipe: You were the one who brought up the historical philosophical foundation of the Constitution. I just pointed out that at the time of it's ratification there were christians who thought that the Constitution was not based on biblical principles and now there are christians that insist that it was based on biblical principles. It either was or wasn't. The evidence of the document itself says that it was not based on biblical principles. Instead of trying to insult me, why don't you discuss what you feel is the historical philosophical foundation of the Constitution? You still haven't explained how property isn't property: Exodus 21:20-21 When a slaveowner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. But if the slave survives a day or two, there is no punishment; for the slave is the owner's property Leviticus 25:44-46 As for the male and female slaves you may have, it is from the nations around you that you may acquire male and female slaves. You may also acquire them from the aliens residing with you, and from their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property. You may keep them as a possession for your children after you, for them to inherit as property. These you may treat as slaves, but as for your fellow Israelites, no one shall rule over the other with harshness. You also haven't given any proof that the NIV translation of Genesis 2 has more authority than the twenty-five I quoted that disagree. You always try to hide your ignorance and intransigence behind terms used in a high school debate but you never really address issues. Basically, you keep using the "'cause I said so" argument. Why don't you just hold your breath until you turn blue? That would be a step up for you. I've stopped calling you a dick because I don't want to associate one of my favorite body parts with you.

Wonderful. The only mistake I saw was that the great Philistine foreskin collection is is in 1 Samuel 18, not 19. I also noted, to my delight, how various other versions change what the KJV has.

Matt, I admire you immensely and I am so impressed by your ability to stand up to a fanatic and bully like Mr P, but I think you are giving this guest way too much credit. I doubt if he could ever come up with an argument more cogent than "Stick it." People who think you did everything you did in hope of gain cannot be more wrong. After reading everything positive I have about you I cannot for a second imagine you slinking around, rubbing your hands together, and planning who your next victim would be. You have exhibited too much courage and generosity for anyone sane to think you had base intentions.

"Unregistered Guest" is less anonymous than Strife767? Before you accuse anyone of hiding under a fictitious name, give us your real name. I just bet you are a product of KHS.

When I applied for college I was required to send in a writing sample. If this is the best you can do, aim low. Try a community college. The transcripts clearly show P's culpability and his letters to the editor show his arrogance.

I was talking about the veracity of the actual event. Was the whole t-shirt incident real or imagined or a lie?

You're a vet and you don't know? I guess you haven't learned any lesson from Nam. Except this time it may be worse. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> One of the things that hastened the end of the war in Vietnam was the changing of the draft to a lottery system in 1968. I remember this well. My number was 359. I had already been determined to be ineligible for military service, but many of my friends who had had deferments before were now worried and worked harder to end the war. Rich people like Bush and Cheney were able to use their influence to avoid the draft and the reality of combat before 1968. At that time being drafted was like being summoned for jury duty--someone once asked if anyone would want to be judged by a group of people who were too stupid to get out of jury duty. People who could would weasel their way out of service.

We still don't know that this was a real event or a drug-induced fantasy in 222dim's brain stem.

I would love to watch a student trying to impress a recruiter by trying to explain Paszkiewicz's illegal behavior.

Right, a terrorist will try not to call attention to himself by wearing a t-shirt that calls attention to him. I bet I could make millions selling T-shirts that say "I am a terrorist." What a numbnut. Meanwhile, I'm still looking for support from Patrat for his initial outrageous statement. In a previous post that was withdrawn he said the ACLU forced a school to punish a girl for wearing a Christian symbol. In reality this was a case of a girl in England--remember the American part of American Civil Liberties Union. She was disciplined for wearing her silver ring that magically repelled sexual advances. The school said it was against their dress code. The school won the case.

This is more of the radical fundie thinking on controversial issues. Over 90% of the world's scientists involved in evoutionary studies accept evolution. The fundies find a handful of scientists--often not involved with evolution--who say that evolution is false. They ignore the 90% and go with the crackpots. The same is true with global warming. Most of the world's environmental scientists say that global warming exists, so they find a few sciency guys who say it does not exist. Fundies ignore all of the evidence and the opinion of many experts and go along with the nutjobs who don't believe in global warming. Brian thinks that the NIV translation is best because it fits his beliefs. He ignores the opinions of the vast majority of biblical scholars and picks a translation that he agrees with. Somehow the small number of conservative, literalist translators that put together the NIV knew better than the vast majority of translators. Bryan asked about the other 5 versions that didn't use the past perfect tense. I already explained that. Keep digging your hole, Bryan. Someday you may wind up in China.

Yes, I found three out of thirty that support your position. All three were put together by fundamentalist biblical literalists. What makes them more authoritive than the twenty-five that do not support your position. Because you say so is not a reason. Take your head out of your ass and come up with a real answer.

Where did you dig this one up? I can't find anything on the internet about it. I know you don't need any facts to prove your points, but some of us do.

I am talking about the historicalphilosophical foundation of the Constitution. At the time it was being ratified there were Christians that said it was un-godly. Now there are Christians who say it is a godly document founded on the Ten Commandments.

Three out of thirty agree with you and they were put together by biblical literalists who had a conservative agenda. I take the scholarship and integrity of the people who worked on the other twenty-five committees much more seriously than yours. Other than the fact that you say so, why is the NIV version the correct one? Take your foot out of your mouth and your head out of your ass. You are such a dick.

I can't find anything in Dingo Dave's posts that assume that. The NIV does not use the past tense. It's the past perfect tense. I noted that I checked thirty versions of the bible and 25 of them used the words "formed" or "made". Among the 25 there were some that were put together by fundies to support the fundie position. They include the good news bible and the message. Your attempt to avoid the argument by bringing in a non-issue shows the weakness of your argument. Can you cite any other bible versions that use the past perfect tense?

In what universe is doing research on a subject qualify as a mental illness? By the way, I hate Kool-Aid and my rectum, or anyone else's, has never spoken.