Blastocysts, Bush and the Bible

Discussion in 'More Serious Topics' started by Dwaine Scum, Jul 3, 2007.

  1. Dwaine Scum

    Dwaine Scum New Member

    Messages:
    11,130
    Being a professional blasphemer, I thought this was a riot

     
  2. ucicare

    ucicare Active Member

    Messages:
    5,605
    Thats pretty funny.
     
  3. phatboy

    phatboy New Member

    Messages:
    6,956
    All that was missing was 'smote me, oh mighty smoter'
     
  4. Joeslogic

    Joeslogic Active Member

    Messages:
    8,426
    The Bible was written in the context of the time that sometimes served a different meaning.

    Pork for instance was a problem in those days and is not now.

    The Christian religion has it's self described followers who regardless of their radical adherence to the literal interpretation are no more closer to the gates of heaven than Alister Crowley. ...... well maybe a little.

    Point is there are also people who looks to point out written text out of context to support the point of the superciliousness of the Bible. I think they would be better served to look at it as evidence of the superciliousness of the radical fundamentalist.

    If when you are reading a script and it seems there is something absurd about a written statement. Maybe someone is trying to talk to you and rather than take a skeptical approach you could consider how the idea applies today. Just be aware of where your enlightenment of ideas come from.

    Thou shall not overly indulge in meal of the sort that is quick and biggie sized, whilst sparing your self the benefit of exertion.
     
  5. Lomotil

    Lomotil Active Member

    Messages:
    10,265
    First and foremost, I'd like to applaud Gary Susser for his entertaining and enlightening literal interpretation of religious notions that should stand right in line with this administration's stand on the stem cell debate. I will not divulge my reasoning on the matter, for two reasons: I'm drunk, and well... fuck it, I'm drunk. I don't care to get this deep into a philosophical tirade with an audience that won't instantly respond.

    I will comment on one portion of Joe's post, however...

    Simple reason: Pork spoils faster, and is susceptible to pathogens more readily than other meat. Of course the primitive mind is going to take this as a sign from "God" that Thou shalt not eat swine. Now, in the age of refrigeration and preservatives, we are able to combat this problem, and sit down to enjoy a slab of ribs or some bacon with our breakfast. It's the Jews loss if you ask me.

    On a related note, I wonder how many of the 'framers' of the Bible were consuming Rye bread... I'm sure that most of you know, if you let it spoil, you're left with LSD (in addition to some other 'undesirables')...
     
  6. Joeslogic

    Joeslogic Active Member

    Messages:
    8,426

Share This Page