Huckabee creates Chick-fil-a appreciation day - NSFW

[Maul the Koala]

jpj3SDeAoO8

Because DimBulb explained everything with Legos. :lol: (2:26 onwards with Brezhnev kissing everyone!)

[Maul the Koala]

And for the history nerds

[thoughtful]

Oh, and since you're back, Jericho, I still am waiting to hear what you would do if there was a law preventing you to marry the person you love.

Yeah, I know you said you'd just have to accept that there was such a law, but what about your actual relationship with your wife? I'd asked:

So you'd be comfy "living in sin" or living a celibate, love-free life? :o

Would you be OK with not being considered next-of-kin for legal reasons, or being kept out of her hospital room in a time of crisis, or risking losing your child if she died?

Would you never have gotten involved with her, and be living a celibate life if the law (or your religion) said it was wrong?

Since those are the choices you would like to impose on others, I'd like to know how you think you would deal with them.

[Patsy]

What's up with the cupcake second row from top, third from left. What are all those gold balls for?

vajazzled? :lol:

[luckystone]

http://www.vajazzling.com/content/what-vajazzling

:shock: :shock:

[DarkAnts]

these may be more appropriate

I want to see someone deep throat one of those cupcakes.

[heinz57]

Seriously? :shock:

So you think that eating shrimp should be legally forbidden?

That the law should state that a virgin raped within the city walls should be put to death?

Would you support a bill of law stating that anyone wearing two different blends of thread should be stoned?

Jericho, I asked you the above questions. Please answer.

[formergothardite]

Well, since Jericho is back, I want to know, are you really saying that more people accepted God in a time where it was also acceptable to murder and steal from Native Americans?

And that less people are accepting God now when it is not acceptable to murder and steal from Native Americans, but it gay people are not shunned?

Oh, and all the other questions that have been asked a couple of times and ignored.

[Deleted07]

The problem with the Bible is that it was created by Man. Not divine providence as many want to believe!

Not to mention that indeed when the good book was being compiled a lot was left out and edited, indeed chosen for a specific effect and audience who was displeased with the Roman-ways, so how does one explain this, Jericho?

How can you think a book that was made through faulted MAN and selectively edited, is to be considered 100% Gods word and want to make it LAW over everyone?

What punishment would you have for someone say committing the 'gay sin'? Stoning to death?

Would you make a woman marry her rapist? If you want The Bible as law, according to the Bible (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

She would indeed have to marry her rapist, or get stoned to death. Both infractions are in The Bible, that you would want as LAW!

Would you really allow this to happen to your own sister, daughter, niece or cousin, or any other unmarried woman in your life? Because it says so in The Bible!?

Awaiting in earnest your reply. Not that you'll answer of course.

[DarkAnts]

The problem with the Bible is that it was created by Man. Not divine providence as many want to believe!

Not to mention that indeed when the good book was being compiled a lot was left out and edited, indeed chosen for a specific effect and audience who was displeased with the Roman-ways, so how does one explain this, Jericho?

How can you think a book that was made through faulted MAN and selectively edited, is to be considered 100% Gods word and want to make it LAW over everyone?

What punishment would you have for someone say committing the 'gay sin'? Stoning to death?

Would you make a woman marry her rapist? If you want The Bible as law, according to the Bible (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

She would indeed have to marry her rapist, or get stoned to death. Both infractions are in The Bible, that you would want as LAW!

Would you really allow this to happen to your own sister, daughter, niece or cousin, or any other unmarried woman in your life? Because it says so in The Bible!?

Awaiting in earnest your reply. Not that you'll answer of course.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

[formergothardite]

Jericho and other fundies will never admit to any of those things. They believe God divinely worked through all the people who wrote the Bible and chose what was put in the Bible. The Bible was essentially written by God in their minds. This is what I was raised to believe.

[Patsy]

:clap: :clap: :clap:

[jesssnerch]

The problem with the Bible is that it was created by Man. Not divine providence as many want to believe!

Not to mention that indeed when the good book was being compiled a lot was left out and edited, indeed chosen for a specific effect and audience who was displeased with the Roman-ways, so how does one explain this, Jericho?

How can you think a book that was made through faulted MAN and selectively edited, is to be considered 100% Gods word and want to make it LAW over everyone?

What punishment would you have for someone say committing the 'gay sin'? Stoning to death?

Would you make a woman marry her rapist? If you want The Bible as law, according to the Bible (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

She would indeed have to marry her rapist, or get stoned to death. Both infractions are in The Bible, that you would want as LAW!

Would you really allow this to happen to your own sister, daughter, niece or cousin, or any other unmarried woman in your life? Because it says so in The Bible!?

Awaiting in earnest your reply. Not that you'll answer of course.

This!! The Bible was hand copied for over a thousand years and has gone through so many translations. You think people didn't add in their own agenda?? Shit, I'm sure the whole "man shall not lie with man" line was added because people did not live that long so the population was small. Same sex relations, while natural, doesn't produce people. How else to curb natural urges and increase the population of followers than to put the fear of god into people?

[JenniferJuniper]

Samuel 18:27 King James Bible

Wherefore David arose and went, he and his men, and slew of the Philistines two hundred men; and David brought their foreskins, and they gave them in full tale to the king, that he might be the king's son in law. And Saul gave him Michal his daughter to wife.

I wonder how many foreskins Jericho paid for his wife?

And slightly off-topic, but is the Biblical foreskin purchase the reason the Gil and Kelly Bates changed Michaela's name from Michal?

[lindsey]

I can't believe I missed this thread until now! I should have guess that our resident idiot (well, one of them anyway) made an appearance from the pagenumbers alone.

Don't have anything to add to the brilliant take-downs, just one little request for the future:

Can we please put a NSFW on a thread with the more sexually explicit pictures or put them under a spoiler?

Don't get me wrong, gay porn is awesome, but while browsing at work... not so much.

I get what the intention behind posting them was, but I'd still prefer to know which threads I better browse when at home.

Anyway, back to "bullying" Jericho into explain why he totally didn't say what he just said.

[Minerva]

I can't believe I missed this thread until now! I should have guess that our resident idiot (well, one of them anyway) made an appearance from the pagenumbers alone.

Don't have anything to add to the brilliant take-downs, just one little request for the future:

Can we please put a NSFW on a thread with the more sexually explicit pictures or put them under a spoiler?

Don't get me wrong, gay porn is awesome, but while browsing at work... not so much.

I get what the intention behind posting them was, but I'd still prefer to know which threads I better browse when at home.

Anyway, back to "bullying" Jericho into explain why he totally didn't say what he just said.

Yeah, I don't think this is the first time people have asked that genital cupcakes be put under spoilers, though we're posting pictures of people kissing, not porn. The pic of the women in their underwear is probably NSFW though.

[jericho]

The problem with the Bible is that it was created by Man. Not divine providence as many want to believe!

2 Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness"

Not to mention that indeed when the good book was being compiled a lot was left out and edited, indeed chosen for a specific effect and audience who was displeased with the Roman-ways, so how does one explain this, Jericho?

Lots of history to this. Here's a website that explains a lot of it. http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/bible/outside.stm

What punishment would you have for someone say committing the 'gay sin'? Stoning to death?

Not at all. As a secular nation, do we punish all biblical sins? No.

Would you make a woman marry her rapist? If you want The Bible as law, according to the Bible (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

The "Bible times" were very different times than today. Here's a link to some explanation on Deuteronomy 22 http://www.gotquestions.org/Deuteronomy-22-28-29-marry-rapist.html

[emmiedahl]

2 Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness"

Yeah, it was pretty brilliant for the writers of the New Testament to put that in there!

Not at all. As a secular nation, do we punish all biblical sins? No.

But you are the one who wants Biblical law imposed on non-Christians. I say if you can wear mixed fibers, then gays can marry. Both are abominations before the LORD with the same punishment.

The word used is indeed the one for rape. It is the word used for forcible sex throughout the Tanakh/OT and NOT one of the words used for consensual sex. And I love how the writer you reference says it is actually quite merciful because otherwise the rape victim's penalty would be death. Ah, those Godly societies.

I would love to hear your answer to the question that keeps being presented: is it more Godly to murder and steal than to allow someone else to marry?

[jericho]

I would love to hear your answer to the question that keeps being presented: is it more Godly to murder and steal than to allow someone else to marry?

In God's eyes it is all sin.

[emmiedahl]

In God's eyes it is all sin.

So we are not less Godly now?

[Austin]

Can we please put a NSFW on a thread with the more sexually explicit pictures or put them under a spoiler?

Don't get me wrong, gay porn is awesome, but while browsing at work... not so much.

I get what the intention behind posting them was, but I'd still prefer to know which threads I better browse when at home.

This.

[emmiedahl]

For those who don't want to go to jercho's link, it says that because women were so poorly treated in Biblical times, it was actually better to marry your rapist because your worth had been destroyed when your hymen was.

In 2 Samuel 13, Amnon, a son of David, rapes his half-sister, Tamar. Tamar was not forced to marry Amnon. Interestingly, though, Tamar seemed to have wanted to marry Amnon after the rape (2 Samuel 13:13-16). Why would she desire such a thing? In that culture, virginity was highly prized. It would have been very difficult for a woman who was not a virgin, and especially a woman who had been raped, to find a man to marry her. It seems that Tamar would have rather married Amnon than live desolate and single the rest of her life, which is what happened to her (2 Samuel 13:20). So, if Deuteronomy 22:28-29 is interpreted to mean that an un-betrothed rape victim must marry her rapist, it could be viewed as merciful to the woman, who, because of the rape, would be considered unmarriageable. In that culture, a woman without a husband would have a very difficult time providing for herself. Unmarried women often had no choice but to sell themselves into slavery or prostitution just to survive.

Is that Godly, jericho? More Godly than two people in love getting married?

[jericho]

Lots of news articles today from liberals essentially saying "Stop picking on Chick Fil-A, its making us look bad"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/r-clarke-cooper/chickfila-empty-calorie-d_b_1711185.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/amazon-vs-chick-fil-a-who_b_1719064.html

http://www.examiner.com/article/chick-fil-a-controversy-bullying-harassment-and-hate

[heinz57]

Jericho, I asked you the above questions. Please answer.

Jericho, WOULD YOU PLEASE ANSWER THE ABOVE QUESTIONS

[emmiedahl]

Lots of news articles today from liberals essentially saying "Stop picking on Chick Fil-A, its making us look bad"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/r-clarke-cooper/chickfila-empty-calorie-d_b_1711185.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/amazon-vs-chick-fil-a-who_b_1719064.html

http://www.examiner.com/article/chick-fil-a-controversy-bullying-harassment-and-hate

I guess that wrecks your theory about the liberal gay agenda. I am still morally and legally free not to give money to someone who donates to hate groups and contributes to the societal disenfranchisement of people I care about.