[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
So is this thread still about the OP? That was interesting…
[/quote]
Notice that? I had high hopes, but even I have lost interest.
Especially after TBG came and took a crap right in the middle of it.
Moving on…
Yeah, I don’t know what to say. Maybe you could try to “police” your thread? I’ve no idea. That is why I created the other thread. Anyway, if you’re interested, I’ll post some thoughts. And maybe the others can create there own thread? (or maybe this will just get lost in all the bitching…eh)
I do have some questions, If you’ve answered them elsewhere, I apologize. Basically, what is the veracity of the claims? Is there proselytizing going on at school? Were prayers said over the loudspeakers? Were bibles handed out?
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Yeah, I don’t know what to say. Maybe you could try to “police” your thread? I’ve no idea. That is why I created the other thread. Anyway, if you’re interested, I’ll post some thoughts. And maybe the others can create there own thread? (or maybe this will just get lost in all the bitching…eh)
I do have some questions, If you’ve answered them elsewhere, I apologize. Basically, what is the veracity of the claims? Is there proselytizing going on at school? Were prayers said over the loudspeakers? Were bibles handed out? [/quote]
Like most claims, there is at least of version of truth to most. For example, two of the youth ministers that I know of have kids in the schools. They will go to have lunch with them approx. two times a week. Most of the other children know them from church, after all they are the equivalent of principal or coach when these kids are at church. The others will stop by their table or call them over. Conversation is usually driven by the kids, so I honestly cannot tell you where all such conversation goes. However, due to the relationship I think it would be safe to assume that God and church events are topics from time to time.
As far as the Bibles, I believe that the full story is that once a year, during larger events, that the Gideons are allowed to place Bibles on a table. No person to man it, the kid are simply informed that they are free if they wish to take one.
I do not yet have the full story on the prayer over intercom. I believe it is something to do with The Fellowship of Christian Athletes. I do not have more detail than that but will post when I do.
[quote]JEATON wrote:
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
I do have some questions, If you’ve answered them elsewhere, I apologize. Basically, what is the veracity of the claims? Is there proselytizing going on at school? Were prayers said over the loudspeakers? Were bibles handed out? [/quote]
Like most claims, there is at least of version of truth to most. For example, two of the youth ministers that I know of have kids in the schools. They will go to have lunch with them approx. two times a week. Most of the other children know them from church, after all they are the equivalent of principal or coach when these kids are at church. The others will stop by their table or call them over. Conversation is usually driven by the kids, so I honestly cannot tell you where all such conversation goes. However, due to the relationship I think it would be safe to assume that God and church events are topics from time to time.
As far as the Bibles, I believe that the full story is that once a year, during larger events, that the Gideons are allowed to place Bibles on a table. No person to man it, the kid are simply informed that they are free if they wish to take one.
I do not yet have the full story on the prayer over intercom. I believe it is something to do with The Fellowship of Christian Athletes. I do not have more detail than that but will post when I do. [/quote]
I guess that my initial reaction is that they are well meaning but probably should be told not to proselytize in the school. Bibles certainly can be handed out outside of the schoolday. Youth ministers coming to talk seems pretty innocent, probably just ask them to direct religious conversations to after school. Moments of silence are the common way to deal with public prayers that doesn’t step on anyone’s feet. Overall, if kids/parents are complaining, those type of activities should probably stop (probably they shouldn’t have started). If they were asked to stop and didn’t, I can understand why the formal complaint was made (although, I don’t think I would have complained myself based on what you are describing). Were school officials asked to stop before the formal complaint was made?
I think you had requested that homosexuals not so much as mention their existence on the other thread. Do you think that non-Christians should be afforded some consideration? Honestly, it sounds like your church should create a private school. You and others of a similar mind would be free to openly discuss Christianity.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
I think you had requested that homosexuals not so much as mention their existence on the other thread. Do you think that non-Christians should be afforded some consideration? Honestly, it sounds like your church should create a private school. You and others of a similar mind would be free to openly discuss Christianity. [/quote]
No, this is a totally different issue. Nothing to do with this topic. Such a bill has been introduced in the state legislature, and both sides have over exaggerated the intent and application. My point is simply that I do not want such topics being introduced to my elementary age children by anyone other than my wife and me. As I see no plausible way this could call into a valid elementary school curriculum there should be no issue.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
His statement, “Your country was founded largely by a cadre of enlightened atheists, diests, and agnostics who favoured the separation of church and state,” is patently and categorically false. Outrageously false. Stupidly false.
I’ve been through the refutation of his ideas before and just aint gonna commit myself to it once again. Too time consuming.
[/quote]
Understood. To be perfectly honest, I don’t know the intimate details of the religious leanings of the founding fathers. I’ve read that most were deist and they were purposefully vague about the issue of a creator. I’ve also read that they were all devout Christians. You can find pretty much everything on the interwebs.
Regardless of what they did or didn’t believe, it just doesn’t sit well with me when people make claims about the success of America as being directly caused by religious beliefs. It just makes no sense. There have been other major powers/empires, before America, and there will be others after. Rome, Greece, Persia, and countless other examples weren’t Christian.
It just makes a lot more sense to me that America came to power through a combination of political, military, and socioeconomic factors - not by divine intervention of the deity of the popular religion.
TheBodyGuard,
We get it you think the best defense is offense. But in this case that won’t work because the cold hard facts are very much against you.
The Facts:
I stated that you began two threads one on how to make homemade porn and the other asking about how to chloroform and duck tape people. Both threads exist. Now in both threads there was not a whole lot of joking. In fact, you were diligently instructing people in one of those threads. And you were very careful how you couched your words in the chloroform thread, no doubt not wanting to attract the sort of attention that might get you in trouble. But sure you can say that you were just kidding. Of course I’ve never heard anyone joke about chloroforming and duck taping someone, much less begin an entire thread on the best way to do it. But you took the fools way out “I was joking” Regardless, the bottom line is that those two threads exist. I told the truth.
So to counter this you decided to try to drag me down to your level and got yourself into trouble (on this forum) by concocting a real whopper. You said that I was a felon. And when asked to produce evidence of this outrageous accusation multiple times by several people including myself you couldn’t, because no such evidence exists as it is a lie. And not just a lie about making up some obscure political fact to win an argument, which happens on this forum on occasion. But a dirty lie to assassinate another persons character. And that is cowardly an reprehensible.
Once again, if you think the people on the PWI forum regardless of their political or religious affiliations are that stupid you are dumber than I originally thought. While you were lying about me, they know that you were lying directly to them and I doubt they appreciate it. I suspect from this point forward when some people don’t respond to you on PWI it won’t be because they agree with your point it will be because many have you on ignore.
I know that when I’m done with you here, in this thread, I will put you on ignore for good. You are a detestable human being and your worst punishment is having to live with yourself.
[quote]JEATON wrote:
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
I think you had requested that homosexuals not so much as mention their existence on the other thread. Do you think that non-Christians should be afforded some consideration? Honestly, it sounds like your church should create a private school. You and others of a similar mind would be free to openly discuss Christianity. [/quote]
No, this is a totally different issue. Nothing to do with this topic. Such a bill has been introduced in the state legislature, and both sides have over exaggerated the intent and application. My point is simply that I do not want such topics being introduced to my elementary age children by anyone other than my wife and me. As I see no plausible way this could call into a valid elementary school curriculum there should be no issue. [/quote]
Of course it’s a totally different issue. But do you really see no similarities between introducing a controversial issue to elementary school children? I realize that from your perspective, your church’s teaching of Christianity is not controversial, but might others think (to borrow your words) “My point is simply that I do not want such topics [God/Faith/Christianity/Islam/Hinduism/Judaism] being introduced to my elementary age children by anyone other than my wife and me. As I see no plausible way this could call into a valid elementary school curriculum there should be no issue.”
For you or I, Christianity is not controversial. For me, the existence of homosexuals is not controversial. But between these two threads, it’s obvious that both topics are very controversial. Do you disagree?
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
[quote]JEATON wrote:
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
I think you had requested that homosexuals not so much as mention their existence on the other thread. Do you think that non-Christians should be afforded some consideration? Honestly, it sounds like your church should create a private school. You and others of a similar mind would be free to openly discuss Christianity. [/quote]
No, this is a totally different issue. Nothing to do with this topic. Such a bill has been introduced in the state legislature, and both sides have over exaggerated the intent and application. My point is simply that I do not want such topics being introduced to my elementary age children by anyone other than my wife and me. As I see no plausible way this could call into a valid elementary school curriculum there should be no issue. [/quote]
Of course it’s a totally different issue. But do you really see no similarities between introducing a controversial issue to elementary school children? I realize that from your perspective, your church’s teaching of Christianity is not controversial, but might others think (to borrow your words) “My point is simply that I do not want such topics [God/Faith/Christianity/Islam/Hinduism/Judaism] being introduced to my elementary age children by anyone other than my wife and me. As I see no plausible way this could call into a valid elementary school curriculum there should be no issue.”
For you or I, Christianity is not controversial. For me, the existence of homosexuals is not controversial. But between these two threads, it’s obvious that both topics are very controversial. Do you disagree?
[/quote]
What I am trying to do is to keep two different topics from two different threads from being confused. I have a general respect for you and we have had several civil discussions on this board over the years. What I am trying to avoid is you unintentionally putting words in my mouth. It is easy to do in these discussions. Several posters seem to be coming from the same position, so one starts to find there comments as a whole as interchangeable.
I answered you in the other thread with the following:
"You might skim back and re read my comments. They are probably not as hard lined as you think. I do think there is more to homosexuality than simply a “choice”. Coke or Pepsi? Penis or Vagina? I do not think homosexuals are inherently evil. While I cannot state that I have any close homosexual friends, I have many acquaintances through work and actually at church as well. I do question the motives and methods of the forefront of the homosexual agenda.
You may be surprised to know that I would be equally against the teaching of Creationism in school. If that is how I want my children taught, then it is my responsibility to do the teaching. (I don’t). Homosexuality is a reality. However the practice of homosexuality and the acceptable public behavior of those of this orientation is all over the board. If anyone is going to help my children navigate this rocky terrain it is going to be me.
Our schools do a poor enough job as it is simply teaching objective studies. Could you imagine the shit storm they could create if we made them the arbiters of social issues such as homosexuality?"
As my thread on the ACLU and Sumner Co Schools got highjacked, I never had opportunity to develop my thoughts on the subject. Again, religion or spirituality is a topic beyond the abilities of our school systems.
The ACLU thread was meant to explore the stated objectives and the real world applications or organizations. It never came to that.
[quote]JEATON wrote:
The ACLU thread was meant to explore the stated objectives and the real world applications or organizations. It never came to that.
[/quote]
Please, elaborate and we’ll see if we can get this thread on a proper course. Just try to ignore the off topic posters if we can.
Christianity is fundamental to the tradition of this country. You can learn about Christianity without being Christian. Homosexuality has nothing to do with the fundamentals of this country (or really in country) and is totally different in nature.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Christianity is fundamental to the tradition of this country. You can learn about Christianity without being Christian. Homosexuality has nothing to do with the fundamentals of this country (or really in country) and is totally different in nature.[/quote]
You’re absolutely right that Christianity is unequivocally a more important topic of discussion in academe. It has been one of the most influential forces in history for two millenia. And for the record, few things bother me more than the current trend in the American university system whereby literally dozens of “gender and sexuality issues” courses are offered every single semester to a student body that cannot collectively come up with an accurate and exhaustive list of the American presidents since FDR.
This is, of course, not an argument for keeping the word ‘gay’ out of a classroom full of teenagers. But the notion that “gender studies” deserves more energy and exposure than basic philosophy, history, math, science, and language courses is as preposterous as it is prevalent.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Don’t mean to sound arrogant but I just aint a-gonna spend as much time here as I have in the past.[/quote]
Say it ain’t so, Push! :-([/quote]
My goal is to post 'bout as much as you do here! That oughta keep me outta the whirlpool that is PWI.[/quote]
What are you talking about, push? You don’t even have,like, 25,000 posts yet.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Don’t mean to sound arrogant but I just aint a-gonna spend as much time here as I have in the past.[/quote]
Say it ain’t so, Push! :-([/quote]
My goal is to post 'bout as much as you do here! That oughta keep me outta the whirlpool that is PWI.[/quote]
What are you talking about, push? You don’t even have,like, 25,000 posts yet. [/quote]
Hey, got your note.
Will respond ASAP, but sounds good…[/quote]
Awesome, the money will be in a brown paper bag behind the old oak tree. You know the one.
Hey wait a minute, I thought this was a PM…!
[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:
[quote]Vires Eternus wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Vires Eternus wrote:
Sorry to post this but after spending some time in PWI I have to ask… how many of you people actually train? [/quote]I had 6000 plus posts in the training forums before here and I will match my training intensity against anybody here. I do still need to get some pics, but there are reasons why that will be difficult now. I have gained about 45 lean pounds as an over 40 guy in the last 5 years.
[/quote]
Damn fine! Just had to wonder, though. Anyone else want to post numbers? My profile’s open and I post vids. Some impressive, some pretty stupid. I’d just like to see if, while posting these discussions on a training site, our collective brawn keeps up with the brain.[/quote]
Seriously? You’re a whopping 215lbs. Do you really want to dick measure lifts at this point in your development? Please sign me…“I can good morning more than you can squat”.
And by the way, your hub is set to private. We cannot view your celebrated (by you) body of work. And PS, I used to post training related stuff, but with the quality of authors here, my posting
“advice” after the likes of Dave Tate is superfluous and arrogant.
[/quote]
Was more to break the constant serious mood here. Not measuring dicks, really. I just wondered with how much slinging goes on in this forum, if any of the regulars cared about training as much as debating. I’m 225 at this point, and can DL 505 I’ll open my profile if you want to see a vid. Not competitive really but not weak either.