Seriously though... Why do people get in discussions if they can't handle them? You just don't come in here, make a few comments, and expect not to be questioned on them. What the hell? Why even bother getting in the discussion if you're going to offer nothing more than generic talking points? Why do these people feel attacked when simple questions are asked? Case in point, trace this thread back...nowhere did I "attack" anyone. I asked questions and the guy is unable to answer them so he plays a victim role to "escape" from the discussion without accountability for what he said? Is that honorable? Is it even civil? What's more, he throws out insults to someone asking simple questions. Is that the way it goes? Is that what Jesus would do? If you don't want to participate in true debate and discussion, stay the hell out of the forum. It's as simple as that. Otherwise, I think anything in here can respectfully be questioned. I don't think it's fair to insult as a first response to basic questions.
Actually, what I meant was..I'm far from perfect and you still aren't measuring up. Continue calling me names. Jesus loves that about you.
Two other posters have tried to explain to you that I am not into proselytizing my religious views -- hence I keep telling you that you should read and interpret for yourself. That is why I allude to your apparent density. I do not feel attacked because my position is unassailable simply because my beliefs are my own and kept to myself. If I were trying to persuade you to share my beliefs, then you could question them to your heart's content. Your inability to understand that leads me to conclude that you are very young, and just in the hunt for a tit for tat, which I have freely given you on the level you clearly seek. What would Jesus do? Pray for an answer. He won't fail you.
Now, if I were "calling you names," I could skewer you with more inventive and vitriolic invective. If you feel "young puppy" is name-calling, then you may refer to me as a salty old dog -- because that would be true.
We both know why you keep saying that, and it isn't for the reason you state. There is great power in denial. That is why you think your position is unassailable. You just offered your beliefs to this forum. The only thing kept to yourself is the ability to support them. This is a debate and discussion forum. If you don't want either, don't come here. It's a fair expectation that viewpoints are challenged in here. Only a weak person would take the road out that you have in the manner you have. Once again, this is a debate and discussion forum. The format itself comes with the reasonable expectation views will be questioned/examined/debated/discussed. My inability to understand this is a debate forum? I'm here for debate. It seems to be the place for that. If you think people are just here for tit for tat, well, I don't know what to tell you. If you think debate is beneath you and your position is beyond reproach, anyone with a logical mind has trouble understanding why you'd choose the DEBATE forum to communicate those positions. Insult me some more. Play elite. Do whatever you must to make yourself feel better. Jesus loves all that.
Okay, I accede to the fact that you are a young idiot with a need to debate. Let's go back to Post #38, where I said, "Despite being a Christian, I am changing my mind...., so I did not infuse my Christian values there. You are the one who began to quote scripture, and I told you how I interpreted that scripture. You disagreed. Big deal. I had ... and have ... no problem with your interpretation because I do not impose my views on other people. What is germane to this thread -- and what I shall be happy to debate -- is whether polygamy and other forms of sexual union should be legitimized since "morality cannot be legislated." To re-state: I have said that I am not opposed to whatever people want to do as long as it doesn't affect me directly. Fair enough? Now, do you agree or disagree? Why?
Time out. I will be back just past noon. There are prior commitments to a congregation who share my Christian values.
Freedom is subjective. If you want real, true freedom, you'd have to do away with government, democratic or not.
So you advocate shedding all laws, from speeding down the highway to shooting people you don't like? That's not anybody's definition of freedom. BTW, I'm awaiting your reply on a democratic government where people are not free or a free people governed by a non-democratic system.
I think Corinthians 7:2 would suffice. Also quoted passages before and after as not to take out of context. 7:4 also makes enough of an argument to interpret the Bible against Polygamy. I also don't believe the Bible specifically encourage Polygamy anywhere, merely that there were Polygamists in the Bible, that's my sentiment, and if I was a SC judge issuing a ruling, I can say that the Bible suggests its best not to be a polygamist. 1 Corinthians 7 [Brick Testament] Instructions on Marriage 7:1 Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. 7:2 Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. 7:3 Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. 7:4 The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. (7:3) Husbands and wives should be kind to each other. 7:5 Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.
Nothing here specifically denounces or condemns polygamy. But before you begin posting further irrelevant scripture, let me state that my point was not to have someone list all the scripture that might "loosely" be interpreted as being against polygamy. Anyone can search for things that define marriage, set forth terms of marriage, etc. The thing is, you can also find as much support for polygamy as you can condemnation of it (if any condemnation exists that is - I don't know of any). Thus, my ultimate point was it's ignorant as hell (in my view) to use anything Christian as a statement against polygamy. I just didn't get to make the point because the guy derailed the conversation into a personal attack. Had he continued a constructive discussion, we would have already been past this point. The bottom line is, I think it's rather simple-minded to use Christian values as a statement against polygamy. Let's count the number of wives had by Abraham, David, Moses, Jacob just to name a few. If anything, a polygamist can find as much support for his chosen lifestyle in scripture itself that almost anywhere else. Get my drift? Polygamy cannot be condemned on a Christian religious level. The argument simply doesn't hold up.
That doesn't make it okay to demonstrate the behavior you have here. That is not a license to live any which way you want. If you think it is, then I'd suggest those polygamists citing Christian values are filled with as much honor as those (like yourself) who try to condemn it using the same material. I simply can't believe someone who openly states they have Christian values is so quick to call someone else an idiot and take such a bitter, condescending attitude with them. Did Jesus really die for your right to call people idiots? You seriously should be ashamed. Hell, I'm almost ashamed on your behalf and I don't think you're fit to piss on.
Well, my young puppy, considering all your responses and know-it-all attitude, I don't see of much of a future for you on the board. As for urinating on anyone, your doodle probably is too limp to get a stream going anywhere except your foot.