Not all tribes support this according to indianz.com.
- Status
I've read every one of your posts (and answered them). You've just kept repeating the same tired message about how you're right and everyone else will come to the light. I couldn't project Fox News or MSNBC any better if I tried.
Since you keep avoiding any real debate and just want to continue tap-dancing, I'll take a moment to go over it word-by-word.
This:
Is the statement you made. No, you didn't quote me, but you're not really bashing homophobic people, you're not being cute and anti-PC, you're not even bashing Christians for the sake of addressing those squeaky-wheel idiots who do or say stupid stuff in the name of Christianity (which I totally understand). You're attempting to get into the hows and whys of Christian Theology in a really snide $#!++y way while at the same time mis-understanding what you're reading. That's pretty much inclusive of any Christians (or Jewish folks) who know that your full of $#!+ for making that statement (that's really the only reason I posted a response).
I still don't know who "they" are and I've already said that the original laws specifically outlining marriage in the Bible came before there were Christians (that was Old Testament / Torah or Jewish law - so any reasoning for putting the laws would have nothing to do with Christians at the time).
Your statement has nothing to do with Sodom and Gimorrah (it's seriously clear that you don't know anything about that story if you think otherwise). Sodom and Gimorrah wasn't about a city being destroyed because they weren't having enough kids (or even for homosexuality - the only "sin" discussed in the wicked city of Sodom and Gimorrah was attempted rape but "the men" intervened before it happened).
That's about par for a RickN debate point though. Let's continue, shall we?
It really doesn't matter what "Catholics and others" believe in the context of why something was put in the bible (there were no Catholics when those first texts were written). Here's the Anecdotal part - just because you know some people (there have been reports) that believe one way, that doesn't mean that "Catholics in general" believe that and lets be honest - even if the only reason for sex is to have children, that doesn't prove that "the reason being gay is prohibited in the bible is because they wanted Christian men and women to have children". The two are mutually exclusive (straight sex and homosexual sex) so they really have nothing to do with each other - one can be prohibited for a different reason than "having more Christian children" and the other can be done without "having more Christian children" (what if you want to have only a few children - nowhere in the bible is that prohibited).
The fact that you can't see this is mind-boggling but it seriously explains a lot of your Black-or-White political posts (although the mental gymnastics in your special pleading / goal-post moving is even more unexplainable - the fact that you do all of this and yet call others "Closet Liberals" is about as hilarious a joke as I've ever heard on OSA).
As for the be fruitful and multiply argument. This means that God wanted Adam and Eve to go forth and make a bunch of kids... Because there weren't like a ton of those around at the time... I'm having a hard time even trying to explain how this does not mean that "not being fruitful and multiplying" was a sin for folks over a dozen generations after Adam and Eve - it clearly wasn't. Lots of folks chose not to have kids in the bible and it wasn't "defying God".
Also, "not being fruitful and multiplying" is a completely separate subject from lusting after men/women you aren't married to (if having more children were the goal wouldn't the best way to be "more fruitful" to be have sex with as many of the opposite sex possible? Why isn't that in the bible?). You're equating "not being fruitful and multiplying" directly with "being gay" (which is again, your mis-interpreted theology from the bible - your whole statement is BS but I'm trying to stick with "RickN Logic" to better explain it... I guess?
$#!+ I don't know at this point - I feel like if I just cop a squat over the keyboard after eating corn it'll make more sense to you).
And here's all your tap-dancing for those playing along at home:
Now that is funny!!!!
For those that have not figured it out yet or are stuck on PC reasoning, the reason being gay is prohibited in the bible is because they wanted Christian men and women to have children thus making more Christians.
EZ, the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is about prohibiting being gay. Why do you think they were destroyed? Where do you think the term sodomy comes from?
As for politics, you just have your panties in a wad because I have not become on of the RP worshipers. Tell you what, it looks like Hillary will be the Dem nominee in 2016 since Soros is backing her. You and the other Paulbots really start working for whichever Paul when the time comes, instead of the normal internet whining, get him enough support that he makes it on the ballot or is at least the GOP nominee, and I will vote for him. I can not wait to see all the Paulbot freaking out when Hillary beats him like a stepchild.
Come on think man. I know you can do it if you try!
Go forth and multiply.
No choking the chicken.
In some sects no contraception.
Heck in a few parts of the world they ignore gays as long as they have a family and fathered children. (in some Muslim sects too)
EDIT: I almost forgot, according to some sects, sex is only for makena da babies.
Add all this together and what does it tell you? Well OK, what would it tell a thinking person?
You can lead a special needs horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Dog rescue, Mostly Dalmatians and Beagles
Big cat rescue, Lions, Tigers and Bears, oh my!
^^Rick's sig links give him a free ride in my book.^^
Big cat rescue, Lions, Tigers and Bears, oh my!
^^Rick's sig links give him a free ride in my book.^^
Even the tribe that allowed the marriage to be performed isn't completely on the same page ... I saw on the news (5, I think) that one tribe official was saying she was gonna have the tribal leaders look into not allowing such marriages any longer and another tribe official saying she thought it was very forward thinking of the tribe and a good thing ...
Dog rescue, Mostly Dalmatians and Beagles
Big cat rescue, Lions, Tigers and Bears, oh my!
^^Rick's sig links give him a free ride in my book.^^
Not only in his sig line, but in his home. He doesn't just talk the talk, he walks the walk ... I can't even tell you how many rescues and fosters he and his darling bride have had in their home over the years I have known them. Not to mention the dogs he picked up from the gun range, took care of and nursed back to health ...
Rick's a good guy in my book ...
OK EZ I will spell it out so that maybe you can understand. First of all remember we are talking the bible here. A book that was written a few hundred years after the fact and while it supposedly contains God's words, they have been interpreted by men and are not 100% God's word.
Second, if you take all of those things I posted,
Go forth and multiply.
No choking the chicken.
In some sects no contraception.
According to some sects, sex is only for having children.
Heck in a few parts of the world they ignore gays as long as they have a family and fathered children. (in some Muslim sects too)
Then it is only logical the powers of the church want their followers to have children. Most of those children will grow up to be followers of that religion too.
Now doesn't it make sense that the reason being gay is prohibited in the bible is because they wanted Christian men and women to have children thus making more Christians.
As for some of your other post about the bible not condemning being Gay, heck even cross dressing is condemned.
"The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God. "
Some other quotes,
"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, "
"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. "
Now do you see what I have been trying to led you to?
Second, if you take all of those things I posted,
Go forth and multiply.
No choking the chicken.
In some sects no contraception.
According to some sects, sex is only for having children.
Heck in a few parts of the world they ignore gays as long as they have a family and fathered children. (in some Muslim sects too)
Then it is only logical the powers of the church want their followers to have children. Most of those children will grow up to be followers of that religion too.
Now doesn't it make sense that the reason being gay is prohibited in the bible is because they wanted Christian men and women to have children thus making more Christians.
As for some of your other post about the bible not condemning being Gay, heck even cross dressing is condemned.
"The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God. "
Some other quotes,
"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, "
"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. "
Now do you see what I have been trying to led you to?
Not only in his sig line, but in his home. He doesn't just talk the talk, he walks the walk ... I can't even tell you how many rescues and fosters he and his darling bride have had in their home over the years I have known them. Not to mention the dogs he picked up from the gun range, took care of and nursed back to health ...
Rick's a good guy in my book ...
Maybe but I do admit to a weakness for screwing with people's minds and trying to get them to think outside the box.
Seriously??? 
So the old miner comes to the trading post after years in the hills alone...
"I'm lookin' fer a woman!" he tells the post owner...
"No women here..." replies the post owner. "they all left when the silver ran out"
"All I can offer you you is the knothole out back, or that old Indian brave that sits around here all day"
"I'll take the knothole!" "I don't go fer that other stuff!" says the miner...
A few months later, the miner returns. "I'm lookin' fer a woman!" he declares.
The post owner replies "still no women - you can use the knothole, or take that old Indian brave."
The miner says "that knothole left a lot to be desired, if you know what I mean. Splinters and all that...but I really don't go for that stuff"
"How much for a turn with the old Indian brave?"
"Fifty bucks" says the owner.
"Fifty bucks! That's kinda high!"
The owner explains: "Fifty bucks. Forty for me, ten for the Indian."
"Why do you get forty and he only gets ten?"
"I have to hold him. He don't go for that stuff, either."
"I'm lookin' fer a woman!" he tells the post owner...
"No women here..." replies the post owner. "they all left when the silver ran out"
"All I can offer you you is the knothole out back, or that old Indian brave that sits around here all day"
"I'll take the knothole!" "I don't go fer that other stuff!" says the miner...
A few months later, the miner returns. "I'm lookin' fer a woman!" he declares.
The post owner replies "still no women - you can use the knothole, or take that old Indian brave."
The miner says "that knothole left a lot to be desired, if you know what I mean. Splinters and all that...but I really don't go for that stuff"
"How much for a turn with the old Indian brave?"
"Fifty bucks" says the owner.
"Fifty bucks! That's kinda high!"
The owner explains: "Fifty bucks. Forty for me, ten for the Indian."
"Why do you get forty and he only gets ten?"
"I have to hold him. He don't go for that stuff, either."
- Status
Similar threads
