On 5/20/12 9:46 AM, Tim wrote:
On May 20, 8:26 am, wrote:
In , dump-on-
says...











...revel in your heresy.

One of my relatives by marriage is a Southern Baptist bible thumper who
is always misquoting or misinterpreting the "old" testament in his
attempts to justify his bigotry. That in itself is funny, because the
"old" testament isn't even really his "big book of religion."

Anyway, he was on same rant about the defense of marriage bull**** the
far-right pushes and tried to quote some religious nonsense about how
the creator wanted marriage to be between one man and one woman.

That's always been a bit confusing because Adam and Eve only had sons.
It also conflicts with Deuteronomy 22:15, where the creator tells a man
with two wives how he should handle the matters that arise when you have
children with two different women. And remember Judges 8:30, in which
Gideon has 71 sons, many, many wives and a concumbine? Well, Gideon's
behavior, what do you expect from a horn player, eh?

Religion...why, it's whatever you want it to be!

Well, there's always this, too!

Deut. 22:13-21

"If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and then turns against her,
14 and charges her with shameful deeds and publicly defames her, and
says, ?I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her a
virgin,? 15 then the girl?s father and her mother shall take and bring
out the evidence of the girl?s virginity to the elders of the city at
the gate. 16 "And the girl?s father shall say to the elders, ?I gave my
daughter to this man for a wife, but he turned against her; 17 and
behold, he has charged her with shameful deeds, saying, "I did not find
your daughter a virgin." But this is the evidence of my daughter?s
virginity.? And they shall spread the garment before the elders of the
city. 18 "So the elders of that city shall take the man and chastise
him, 19 and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give it
to the girl?s father, because he publicly defamed a virgin of Israel.
And she shall remain his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days. 20
"But if this charge is true, that the girl was not found a virgin, 21
then they shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father?s house,
and the men of her city shall stone her to death because she has
committed an act of folly in Israel, by playing the harlot in her
father?s house; thus you shall purge the evil from among you," (Deut.
22:13-21).

OT (mosaic) law.

And your point?

Virginity was highly overrated then...and now.

On 5/20/2012 9:11 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 5/20/12 9:01 AM, X ` Man wrote:
...revel in your heresy.

One of my relatives by marriage is a Southern Baptist bible thumper who
is always misquoting or misinterpreting the "old" testament in his
attempts to justify his bigotry. That in itself is funny, because the
"old" testament isn't even really his "big book of religion."

Anyway, he was on same rant about the defense of marriage bull**** the
far-right pushes and tried to quote some religious nonsense about how
the creator wanted marriage to be between one man and one woman.

That's always been a bit confusing because Adam and Eve only had sons.
It also conflicts with Deuteronomy 22:15, where the creator tells a man
with two wives how he should handle the matters that arise when you have
children with two different women. And remember Judges 8:30, in which
Gideon has 71 sons, many, many wives and a concumbine? Well, Gideon's
behavior, what do you expect from a horn player, eh?

Religion...why, it's whatever you want it to be!




Uh, concubine, not concucumber.

Correct. Concucumber is Dr. 3Xs sex toy.

On 5/20/2012 9:57 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 5/20/12 9:46 AM, Tim wrote:
On May 20, 8:26 am, wrote:
In , dump-on-
says...











...revel in your heresy.

One of my relatives by marriage is a Southern Baptist bible thumper who
is always misquoting or misinterpreting the "old" testament in his
attempts to justify his bigotry. That in itself is funny, because the
"old" testament isn't even really his "big book of religion."

Anyway, he was on same rant about the defense of marriage bull**** the
far-right pushes and tried to quote some religious nonsense about how
the creator wanted marriage to be between one man and one woman.

That's always been a bit confusing because Adam and Eve only had sons.
It also conflicts with Deuteronomy 22:15, where the creator tells a man
with two wives how he should handle the matters that arise when you
have
children with two different women. And remember Judges 8:30, in which
Gideon has 71 sons, many, many wives and a concumbine? Well, Gideon's
behavior, what do you expect from a horn player, eh?

Religion...why, it's whatever you want it to be!

Well, there's always this, too!

Deut. 22:13-21

"If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and then turns against her,
14 and charges her with shameful deeds and publicly defames her, and
says, ?I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her a
virgin,? 15 then the girl?s father and her mother shall take and bring
out the evidence of the girl?s virginity to the elders of the city at
the gate. 16 "And the girl?s father shall say to the elders, ?I gave my
daughter to this man for a wife, but he turned against her; 17 and
behold, he has charged her with shameful deeds, saying, "I did not find
your daughter a virgin." But this is the evidence of my daughter?s
virginity.? And they shall spread the garment before the elders of the
city. 18 "So the elders of that city shall take the man and chastise
him, 19 and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give it
to the girl?s father, because he publicly defamed a virgin of Israel.
And she shall remain his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days. 20
"But if this charge is true, that the girl was not found a virgin, 21
then they shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father?s house,
and the men of her city shall stone her to death because she has
committed an act of folly in Israel, by playing the harlot in her
father?s house; thus you shall purge the evil from among you," (Deut.
22:13-21).

OT (mosaic) law.

And your point?

Virginity was highly overrated then...and now.

Spoken by a man who has never deflowered one.

In article 8d06b02e-9026-4729-a07b-
, says...

On May 20, 8:26*am, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , dump-on-
says...











...revel in your heresy.

One of my relatives by marriage is a Southern Baptist bible thumper who
is always misquoting or misinterpreting the "old" testament in his
attempts to justify his bigotry. That in itself is funny, because the
"old" testament isn't even really his "big book of religion."

Anyway, he was on same rant about the defense of marriage bull**** the
far-right pushes and tried to quote some religious nonsense about how
the creator wanted marriage to be between one man and one woman.

That's always been a bit confusing because Adam and Eve only had sons.
It also conflicts with Deuteronomy 22:15, where the creator tells a man
with two wives how he should handle the matters that arise when you have
children with two different women. And remember Judges 8:30, in which
Gideon has 71 sons, many, many wives and a concumbine? Well, Gideon's
behavior, what do you expect from a horn player, eh?

Religion...why, it's whatever you want it to be!

Well, there's always this, too!

Deut. 22:13-21

"If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and then turns against her,
14 and charges her with shameful deeds and publicly defames her, and
says, ?I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her a
virgin,? 15 then the girl?s father and her mother shall take and bring
out the evidence of the girl?s virginity to the elders of the city at
the gate. 16 "And the girl?s father shall say to the elders, ?I gave my
daughter to this man for a wife, but he turned against her; 17 and
behold, he has charged her with shameful deeds, saying, "I did not find
your daughter a virgin." But this is the evidence of my daughter?s
virginity.? And they shall spread the garment before the elders of the
city. 18 "So the elders of that city shall take the man and chastise
him, 19 and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give it
to the girl?s father, because he publicly defamed a virgin of Israel.
And she shall remain his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days. 20
"But if this charge is true, that the girl was not found a virgin, 21
then they shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father?s house,
and the men of her city shall stone her to death because she has
committed an act of folly in Israel, by playing the harlot in her
father?s house; thus you shall purge the evil from among you," (Deut.
22:13-21).

OT (mosaic) law.

And your point?

If you take a wife and she's not a virgin, you're supposed to kill her.
Says so right in the Bible!

On May 20, 8:57*am, X ` Man dump-on-conservati...@anywhere-you-
can.com wrote:
On 5/20/12 9:46 AM, Tim wrote:









On May 20, 8:26 am, *wrote:
In , dump-on-
says...

...revel in your heresy.

One of my relatives by marriage is a Southern Baptist bible thumper who
is always misquoting or misinterpreting the "old" testament in his
attempts to justify his bigotry. That in itself is funny, because the
"old" testament isn't even really his "big book of religion."

Anyway, he was on same rant about the defense of marriage bull**** the
far-right pushes and tried to quote some religious nonsense about how
the creator wanted marriage to be between one man and one woman.

That's always been a bit confusing because Adam and Eve only had sons..
It also conflicts with Deuteronomy 22:15, where the creator tells a man
with two wives how he should handle the matters that arise when you have
children with two different women. And remember Judges 8:30, in which
Gideon has 71 sons, many, many wives and a concumbine? Well, Gideon's
behavior, what do you expect from a horn player, eh?

Religion...why, it's whatever you want it to be!

Well, there's always this, too!

Deut. 22:13-21

"If any man takes a wife and goes in to her and then turns against her,
14 and charges her with shameful deeds and publicly defames her, and
says, ?I took this woman, but when I came near her, I did not find her a
virgin,? 15 then the girl?s father and her mother shall take and bring
out the evidence of the girl?s virginity to the elders of the city at
the gate. 16 "And the girl?s father shall say to the elders, ?I gave my
daughter to this man for a wife, but he turned against her; 17 and
behold, he has charged her with shameful deeds, saying, "I did not find
your daughter a virgin." But this is the evidence of my daughter?s
virginity.? And they shall spread the garment before the elders of the
city. 18 "So the elders of that city shall take the man and chastise
him, 19 and they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give it
to the girl?s father, because he publicly defamed a virgin of Israel.
And she shall remain his wife; he cannot divorce her all his days. 20
"But if this charge is true, that the girl was not found a virgin, 21
then they shall bring out the girl to the doorway of her father?s house,
and the men of her city shall stone her to death because she has
committed an act of folly in Israel, by playing the harlot in her
father?s house; thus you shall purge the evil from among you," (Deut.
22:13-21).

OT (mosaic) law.

And your point?

Virginity was highly overrated then...and now.

Why?

On May 20, 9:10*am, iBoaterer wrote:


If you take a wife and she's not a virgin, you're supposed to kill her.
Says so right in the Bible!


OT (mosaic) law.

And your point?

On 5/20/12 6:01 PM, Tim wrote:
On May 20, 9:10 am, wrote:


If you take a wife and she's not a virgin, you're supposed to kill her.
Says so right in the Bible!


OT (mosaic) law.

And your point?

Christians are always citing Mosaic law, especially conservative fundie
christians, to state beliefs and standards of behavior. How do I know?
The bible tells me so. And what could be more Mosaic than the 10
commandments?

Of course, modern day christians are *selective* in what they want to
impose on others.

On 5/20/12 6:00 PM, Tim wrote:
On May 20, 8:57 am, X ` Mandump-on-conservati...@anywhere-you-
can.com wrote:


Virginity was highly overrated then...and now.

Why?

It's bit of a simple-minded way to judge the "purity" or "righteousness"
or whatever of a partner, among other things.

On May 20, 5:20*pm, X ` Man dump-on-conservati...@anywhere-you-
can.com wrote:
On 5/20/12 6:01 PM, Tim wrote:

On May 20, 9:10 am, *wrote:

If you take a wife and she's not a virgin, you're supposed to kill her..
Says so right in the Bible!

OT (mosaic) law.

And your point?

Christians are always citing Mosaic law, especially conservative fundie
christians, to state beliefs and standards of behavior. How do I know?
The bible tells me so. And what could be more Mosaic than the 10
commandments?

Of course, modern day christians are *selective* in what they want to
impose on others.

OK, so again, what's your point?

On May 20, 5:22*pm, X ` Man dump-on-conservati...@anywhere-you-
can.com wrote:
On 5/20/12 6:00 PM, Tim wrote:

On May 20, 8:57 am, X ` Mandump-on-conservati...@anywhere-you-
can.com *wrote:

Virginity was highly overrated then...and now.

Why?

It's bit of a simple-minded way to judge the "purity" or "righteousness"
or whatever of a partner, among other things.


Very simple indeed Harry, I thought you were above that.