[QUOTE=guitrguy]Moses if the bible is not anti-gay how do you explain the storie of sodom and gamora and noahs ark?[/QUOTE]

The bible is more or less anti-marriage, also. It's all context man. The old testamanent made no real mention of homosexuality, and the new testament holds it in the same regards as eating shellfish. Are you gay? Nah. Do you eat shellfish? HEATHEN!!!!

[QUOTE=guitrguy]Moses if the bible is not anti-gay how do you explain the storie of sodom and gamora and noahs ark?[/QUOTE]
God did not destroy the cities and create a flood because they were homosexual, it was just because they were licentious and immoral. They were corrupt and it's different than being homosexual.

The Catholic Church is anti-gay in a way, but not in a way that seems offensive to me. They don't consider gays to be evil and that they should all be sentenced to death, but homosexuality is condemned in Catholicism.

[url]http://www.cheridinovo.com/[/url]

Look up her books. She gave a speech about homosexuality at my school. She used to sell drugs, and she only ever aknowledged the church because they fed her. She's now a revered and actually performed the first gay marriage in Ontario (possibly Canada). She's written books on the subject. She also married my video teacher and his husband.

[QUOTE=Moses]God did not destroy the cities and create a flood because they were homosexual, it was just because they were licentious and immoral. They were corrupt and it's different than being homosexual.[/QUOTE]
For teh page turn.

Is it ironic that I'm listening to the song "God gives head in Heaven"?

No, just a coincedence.

Meh. So anyways, I deleted my entire iPod tonight.

Well, my temper has come back to bite me in the [size=2]a[/size]ss again.

During an argument in the L&R thread last night, I ended up saying things in a moment of anger that I regretted. And though I was willing to put the conversation in the past and move on, the MXer I was arguing with comes in tonight, sees me in the thread, and immediately tries to pick a fight about it.

What an [size=2]a[/size]ss. I told him I'm not going to get into it with him again if he's going to be that way, but he still tries to goad me into it. I decidedly to just completely disregard him from this point on. Though if he pulls this again tomorrow, I'm just going to put him on my ignore list. No point in even seeing his posts if I can't trust him to not be bellicose and belligerent.

[QUOTE=CocaineAndCrucifixes]Meh. So anyways, I deleted my entire iPod tonight.[/QUOTE]And why?

My mp3 player can only hold 80 songs, I think. It's crap.

[QUOTE=Steerpike]Well, my temper has come back to bite me in the [size=2]a[/size]ss again.

During an argument in the L&R thread last night, I ended up saying things in a moment of anger that I regretted. And though I was willing to put the conversation in the past and move on, the MXer I was arguing with comes in tonight, sees me in the thread, and immediately tries to pick a fight about it.

What an [size=2]a[/size]ss. I told him I'm not going to get into it with him again if he's going to be that way, but he still tries to goad me into it. I decidedly to just completely disregard him from this point on. Though if he pulls this again tomorrow, I'm just going to put him on my ignore list. No point in even seeing his posts if I can't trust him to not be bellicose and belligerent.[/QUOTE]

This fight was with Tiger, right?

Doesn't surprise me, that guy is just a waste of space.

[QUOTE=Illmatic]This fight was with Tiger, right?

Doesn't surprise me, that guy is just a waste of space.[/QUOTE]

Good guess. I don't know what's with that guy. He seems to think he's much smarter than he really is, and he's way too confrontational.

Apparently, he asserts that my clinical depression makes me weak, and that he is strong, regardless of the fact that it's a medical condition. He then pretends he's not being egotistical.

That sort of thing really burns me, you know?

He is a Pit vet. What do you expect?

And depends on your defintion of "weak". Someone with cancer is "weak" and that's a medical condition, right? It may not be your fault but it IS a debilitating factor, you know what I mean?

[QUOTE=Illmatic]He is a Pit vet. What do you expect?

And depends on your defintion of "weak". Someone with cancer is "weak" and that's a medical condition, right? It may not be your fault but it IS a debilitating factor, you know what I mean?[/QUOTE]

What he means is weakness of character. :rolleyes:

Believe me, he seemed really intent on picking a fight tonight. One woman in the thread had a rather open attitude in regards to sex. When someone brought up that it was time to end the conversation and move on to something else, we all got the picture. But Tiger comes in with an inflammatory remark against her anyway.

Well, like I said, I'm prepared to put him on the ignore list if he keeps this up.

I wouldn't hesitate to do so Steerpike. This guy sounds like a real waste of space.

It sure didn't take long for a drummers poll to take off, did it?

[QUOTE=leppermessiah]
It sure didn't take long for a drummers poll to take off, did it?[/QUOTE]
Ooh. I always wanted one of those.

Lars Ulrich FTW.


Not really.

Have you guys noticed that R&M has been getting less viewers since it hasn't been near the top?

Not really.
I thought it had more recently.

It's probably just less guests viewing R&M.

I haven't noticed lessing posting.

[QUOTE=Steerpike]What he means is weakness of character. :rolleyes:

Believe me, he seemed really intent on picking a fight tonight. One woman in the thread had a rather open attitude in regards to sex. When someone brought up that it was time to end the conversation and move on to something else, we all got the picture. But Tiger comes in with an inflammatory remark against her anyway.

Well, like I said, I'm prepared to put him on the ignore list if he keeps this up.[/QUOTE]
oh, the concept of choice. Just do whatever you want

Sueno would be proud

[QUOTE=Bartender]
Sartre. Choice of five questions; since I'm bored:

1. According to [B]Sartre[/B], in what ways and to what extent does consciousness reveal the external world to us? Is he correct?
2. What does Sartre mean by "nothingness"? Is this concept coherent?
3. Critically examine the metaphysics of Sartre's conception of freedom.
4. What are Sartrean authenticity and bad faith? Are they genuinely possible?
5. Is Sartre committed to an unpalatable moral subjectivism?
[/QUOTE]

Amazing! I'm seriously thinking of picking philosophy next year. I find both philosophy and psychology fulfilling and easy to identify with. I feel that this is where I belong, if you know the feeling.

[QUOTE=ShadowsFallen]I've noticed this. Compared to people of other religions (or nonreligious people), Catholics seems extemely full of themselves.

This situation does suck. I don't think I'm a terrible person like she told me, and I don't think my entire life is worthless just because "I don't have God in my heart". I just wish people would leave me alone about this s[SIZE="2"]hi[/SIZE]t and let me believe what I want to believe. It's been shoved down my throat my entire life and I'm sick of it.

By that I mean people around here. :p[/QUOTE]

It was about time you told her the truth. I'm sure she already knew but she didnt want to admit. I think that her "obsession" is too serious since it affects your entire life (catholic school). You need to insist and explain to her that morality has nothing to do with religion. If she kept on blaming me after that I would say something true (partly at least) and cruel like: "Are you satisfied now that you led two people into depression? Have you ever wondered what makes me -not you!- happy? I dont want to be "saved" dammit, leave me alone!..."

Another fair point would be: A true God would understand people's difficulty in believing in him, right?

[QUOTE=]So, basically, you want to be a good person in life if you want to be happy in the afterlife.[/QUOTE]

Such a childish perception.

[QUOTE=Deth]My family is so un-religious it's crazy. We kinda pretend we like Jesus but that's about it.[/QUOTE]

:lol: Same here!

Basically this reminds me a story a friend of mine told me. She grew up in an un-religious family and she had never gone to church until her grandmother forced her to do so (she was a kid at the time). After a while she noticed that people around her were kneeling (people do this in orthodox churches) and asked her grandmother: Hey what are these people looking for? :lol:

[QUOTE=Moses] I'm saying that you don't need religion [B]but you have to [/B]believe in somthing other than evolution to explain things like desire or hate. Whether you'd like to explain it or not is up to you. I'm just curious not offensive.[/QUOTE]

Who said that?

Psychology and evolution provide theories that could answer all your questions.

[QUOTE=Steerpike]Apparently, he asserts that my clinical depression makes me weak, and that he is strong, regardless of the fact that it's a medical condition. He then pretends he's not being egotistical.

That sort of thing really burns me, you know?[/QUOTE]

Is he the kind of person who questions the legitimacy of psychological issues? Like saying that depression is just sadness and weakness and it's up to you to get it over? Doh...

Bah, religion talk.

[QUOTE=Jom]
Ah, I see. How many words does it have to be, even though you have 700 already? Is there a limit?[/QUOTE]

2,000 words. I think we're allowed a little leeway either way, but 2,000 (not including titles, headers, footnotes, etc) is what we should aim for.

Normally I'd just be starting it tonight. I've done essays the night before since a few years into school, and they've always worked out fine, but I have an exam tomorrow as well, so I have to get a little revision done too.

[QUOTE=people]
various games[/QUOTE]

Perfect Dark was awesome, as a multiplayer game especially, but I preferred Goldeneye. Maybe just for sentimental reasons.

Goldeneye had better single player.

NP: Destruction - Machinery Of Lies

But the multiplayer is what made Goldeneye the greatest game.

Yeah.

Man with the Golden Gun was the greatest.

We always used to make up scenarios, to try and keep the game fresh. Most popular was, I think, a Protect The Target style game on the Complex level. There'd be one player who was The President, who was only ever allowed a standard PPK or a single revolver, or something like that, to protect himself with, who had to be protected from death, basically. And there were loads of variations, because you could have the three other players as bodyguards and a small horde of bots trying to kill him, or one player as a Head of Security with a gang of bots under him, and two player-assassins trying to do the killing, etc.

Was a lot of fun.

My friends and I used to just go crazy on free-for-all with the maximum number of bots. Oh the horrors of twin magnums running wild.

We used to play a lot of proximity mines, especially on Facility and Archives. One of my mates was the master at them.

I still have nightmares :(

We eventually banned proximity mines. If any bots got a hold of them, they'd bloody well suicide you.

Proximity mines were turned off when we had a President. Otherwise you could just lob one in the window of that little building, and the game was over.

They were great on some other levels though.

I always liked playing with knives on slow motion, but I only ever got to play it for five minutes at a time. Everyone else got bored.