Post New

Please, let us set aside our petty squabbles and come together in these trying times to pray for Biden...
... Psalms 109:8

so far the GOP seems hellbent on giving the 2024 election to Biden... We will see if they can change course (or at least unify a course) soon enough to put up some sort of fight for it.
Alan

bighairymike: (invokes) Psalms 109:8

Republicans are a classy bunch. Me, I'm thankful everyday that Trump is no longer president and that Biden holds that office.

Very funny. Though I had to look it up:

Psalms 109:8
'Let his days be few; and let another take his office.'

Nixon might have enjoyed the vengeance against enemies prayers in Psalm 109, written by King David around 1000 BC. But Wrath is one of the 7 deadly sins, as written by Pope Gregory I in 590 AD.

Religion and politics are a toxic mix. Church membership is the US has dropped sharply over the last 20 years. Many religious groups have become more politically aligned, leading to a sense of alienation for those who do not share their political views.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/248837/church-members...
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/09/13/mo...

Hilarious.

Quoting the Bible on the Atheist board as though it means something. Everyone here knows the book is a word salad of often opposite thoughts; it makes no sense and has no relevance to any society that has progressed beyond the goat-herding stage.

It's processed cheese, full of stories made up by terrified peasants, handed down verbally across generations, written down hundreds of years later, edited and revised in the 3rd century, rewritten and rewritten, exorcised by Kings who didn't like certain parts of it, translated from one language to another to another to another, and then finally passed out in hotel room bureaus where hookers and politicians hang out. How charming.

Also, the first time I saw this joke was when Obama was President, so, for the record, stale comedy isn't funny, especially when it wasn't even funny when fresh.

Here's a more recent one:

Trump spent more time in Stormy Daniels than he has in church.

Do try to keep up.

It's processed cheese, full of stories made up by terrified peasants, handed down verbally across generations, written down hundreds of years later, edited and revised in the 3rd century, rewritten and rewritten, exorcised by Kings who didn't like certain parts of it, translated from one language to another to another to another, and then finally passed out in hotel room bureaus where hookers and politicians hang out. How charming

Ouch! But so true. And to this damning list I'd add the dozen or so modern English "interpretations" aka, translations, out there today to suit the needs, prejudces, and intellectual capabilities of different groups of the "faithful". See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English_Bible.... Here's a list sorted by best selling order:

Rank	Name                           Abbreviation     Published 
1	New International Version               NIV	1978
2	English Standard Version                ESV	2001
3	New Living Translation                  NLT	1996
4	King James Version                      KJV	1611
5	Christian Standard Bible                CSB	2017
6	New King James Version                  NKJV	1982
7	Reina-Valera                            RVR	1602
8	New International Reader's Version	NIrV	1996
9	New American Standard Bible             NASB	1971
10	The Message                             MSG	2002

One would think The word Of God" should be able to stand on its own two feet.

[Edit: the Reina-Valera bible is actually in Spanish not English.]

1 New International Version NIV 1978
2 English Standard Version ESV 2001
3 New Living Translation NLT 1996
4 King James Version KJV 1611
5 Christian Standard Bible CSB 2017
6 New King James Version NKJV 1982
7 Reina-Valera RVR 1602
8 New International Reader's Version NIrV 1996
9 New American Standard Bible NASB 1971
10 The Message MSG 2002

------------------------

The dates in that list are particularly interesting. The King James Version stands for 360 years and then suddenly starting in 1971, eight more versions come out. I wonder why all of a sudden, there became a need for all these new renditions.

I wonder why all of a sudden, there became a need for all these new renditions.

Perhaps because the KJV was too vague and left too much to interpretation, and so various groups wanted to impose a more standard, more readable, less arguable "spin" on the text to suit their particular wishes for political, and social norms?

erhaps because the KJV was too vague and left too much to interpretation, and so various groups wanted to impose a more standard, more readable, less arguable "spin" on the text to suit their particular wishes for political, and social norms?

__________________

No doubt. The oddity that struck me was the timing. KJV was fine for a couple of centuries and then common beliefs fragmented, and not just split in two or three but so extensively, and more or less all at once. Perhaps something like the social unrest, war protesting and what not of the 60's and 70's was some sort of trigger.

Never been a big prayer guy here -- never know who or what I'm praying to.

But I've always had good thoughts for Biden - even in my post partisan days on TMF - -when Biden was a Senator. Always loved his demeanor, humor, and felt he was still somewhat a real guy.

Felt the same later on - - voted in 2020 for him - -this was still while the extremists on the Left where whining "old" "White" "male".

Luckily - they had an American liked Biden to run and he won. Sure Clyburn tipped it that way - - and yes, specter of victory Wass all it took for Club Greedy Corporatist Liberals to throw aside all the diverse candidates and go for Biden.

But I'm glad he's there.

He's one of the things preventing the Bolsheviks and Leftist Talibans from taking over.

Perhaps something like the social unrest, war protesting and what not of the 60's and 70's was some sort of trigger.

Well, Roe -V- Wade was decided in 1973, so that could explain them all except the NASB 1971 translation.

Everyone here knows the book is a word salad of often opposite thoughts; it makes no sense and has no relevance to any society that has progressed beyond the goat-herding stage.

It's processed cheese, full of stories made up by terrified peasants, handed down verbally across generations, written down hundreds of years later, edited and revised in the 3rd century, rewritten and rewritten, exorcised by Kings who didn't like certain parts of it, translated from one language to another to another to another, and then finally passed out in hotel room bureaus where hookers and politicians hang out. How charming.

Jordan Peterson takes a Jungian approach and is impressed by the bible as the primary example in western civilization of the stories that have meant something to humans at the deepest level for the longest time. That the stories were changed as they were passed down for centuries before writing, and even after writing, is "the imperfect copying mechanism" that evolution requires. That the parts copied both orally and in writing would be "filtered" with the most powerful parts being passed down more readily and widely than the weaker parts is the "selection mechanism" required for evolution. If biological evolution can "tell us about life" by showing us the product of evolution in the cheetah, the whale, the sequoia, the cockroach and the modern virus, what are the chances that the bible has nothing to tell us about humanity?

It is completely possible to to find the bible to be an amazing thing without having to think it describes the supernatural part of nature with any fidelity at all.

I'm not really used to this board so I may be barking at the wrong fire hydrant bringing up something like this here. Unless "atheism" has a dogma that goes beyond, well, not believing in god, would big tent atheism allow for someone finding in the bible things of value? Sort of post-traumatic version of atheism?

R:

One would think The word Of God" should be able to stand on its own two feet.

Would one? Why? Especially if one were an atheist?

In any case, the Bible is the word of man whose sources are diverse and about which much more is known now than for at least the first thousand years of the Common Error, so why wouldn't scholaraly work be expected to improve, elucidate and illuminate the document, or really the set of documents which are the bible?

R:

Perhaps because the KJV was too vague and left too much to interpretation, and so various groups wanted to impose a more standard, more readable, less arguable "spin" on the text to suit their particular wishes for political, and social norms?

No doubt.

Can you think of a single area of study and knowledge which does not have literally reams more information, research results, discussion, analysis, etc. published in the late 20th century than the mid-1600s?

It so much fun to pretend that those we disagree with are complete idiots, and maybe that is the "real" purpose of "Atheist fools".

But if you actually pay attention to what is written about the bible, what is studied about the bible, the impact of learning the history of the bible on people who start out as literalists, you will probably think the increased number of editions is because researchers had a lot more to say about the bible and its history including the way it is translated, the choice of the books included, the likelihood that some books are forgeries, etc. Just like the greater amount of publishing in Physics, Chemistry, Sociology, Psychology, Political Science, Economics, History, and I'm sure a bunch of other subjects which have been published more in the 20th century than in the 17th.

R:

That the stories were changed as they were passed down for centuries before writing, and even after writing, is "the imperfect copying mechanism" that evolution requires.

That doesn't seem quite right....

As species evolve they generally replace the species they evolved from. Right? (Yes, there are exceptions)

To wit, Lucy's crew is as dead and gone as Lucy. May they rest in everlasting peace. That's evolution.

On the other and, all the various vintages of theological novels that caused mayhem and death when they schismed are still around causing mayhem and death.

It was thus when the Sunni & Shits had their schism. Both flavors of barbarianism continue the fight. Same deal with the 2100 flavors of xtianity.

so why wouldn't scholaraly work be expected to improve, elucidate and illuminate the document, or really the set of documents which are the bible?

Improve on "the word of god?" -- Son, that's blasphemy; fightin' words (*wink*).

Speaking of elucidating and illuminating... what's up with speaking in tongues and playing with rattlesnakes at church?

Unless "atheism" has a dogma that goes beyond, well, not believing in god, would big tent atheism allow for someone finding in the bible things of value?

It is possible, though far from certain, that the Bible once had 'things of value.' In the most primitive society there may have usefulness in having otherwise ignorant people band together against adversaries, although I would offer adversaries such as 'the weather' rather than 'that other tribe that believes those other things' [See: every religious war since the beginning of history and the countless millions of unnecessary deaths.]

One of the things that is surely not of value is continuing to believe the stories have literal meaning, as, say, 25% of Americans (the approximate percentage of Evangelicals and Fundamentalists) do. They will tell you, indeed, they will insist that every word of the Bible is inerrant, and that these things are literally true:

A donkey can talk
Women came from men (tip: it's the other way around)
A woman turned into a pillar of salt
The sun stood still for a day
Hundreds of thousands of animals lived on a boat for 6 weeks
Water droplets didn't scatter light rays until after Noah
Blowing a horn will make stone walls fall down
Plants grew before there was sunlight
One person knows what God wants, and you must obey
A man lived in a fish
It's OK to rape a woman if you pay her father
God destroyed a building because it was too tall (but leaves geosynchronous satellites alone)
Genocide can be a good thing
Many people have been resurrected
One guy lived over 900 years
A river turned to blood
The very first man and woman had 3 sons but no daughters

If you like I could go on for pages and pages with this nonsense, and I reiterate, 25% of the country believes this to be true. I'll also acknowledge that the percentage used to be higher, much to the detriment of people like Copernicus and Galileo, and thereby the entire human race which was set back centuries in scientific progress. Or perhaps I should mention the prohibitions on dissection, medicines, food choice, even tattooing?

No, the Bible is just loaded with malarkey, and what little value it has is as an amusement for how desperately ignorant primitive peoples were. Unfortunately, many clung to those myths and used them as a source of power - and still do today - slowing down human progress yet again.

But if you actually pay attention to what is written about the bible, what is studied about the bible, the impact of learning the history of the bible on people who start out as literalists, you will probably think the increased number of editions is because researchers had a lot more to say about the bible and its history including the way it is translated, the choice of the books included, the likelihood that some books are forgeries, etc.

Unconvincing apologia. The history of the Bible is not about 'research', it's about power. The King James Bible is because of (do I really need to explain this?) King James. The Council of Nicaea was a way for the establishment church, which was still fighting pagan and other religions, to codify its myths and provide a solid marketing front against others. It is true that everywhere, everything religion is used for control (yes, including Ancient Egypt, Aztec priests and all the others, but we are talking about the Bible here ) and those many revisions are just another way to insert and assert one point of view over another. (See: Leviticus vs Jesus)

The Bible is a joke. It's a sad joke, to be sure, and one that has, on balance, been a negative force on humanity (thank you Joel Osteen, et al) but I suppose the relatively few passages for good ('do unto others') should count for something, so that probably excuses all the wars, prejudice, miscegenation, prejudice, belief in magic, and the rest that it has fostered down through the ages.

Copied.

Bible replaced with Quran.

Gotta log in and post on the nice little forum for Muslim group in France.


On a side note - my lack of faith in any organized religion is just that - lack of faith in any organized religion. Not a fake yet eloquent Google Jockey who likes to just disparage one faith because it's en vouge on the left.

Be back in a few....

This one should result in some colorful responses over there. Who knows, might put someone in a foul mood.....

Let the Haughty have recs.

But, may their acolytes continue to feel the results of such.

We've arrived at a time where the Colonizers can't get away with it anymore. I won't expand on that point.

Goofy,

It doesn't really matter if 25% of the world or even 95% of the world thinks the bible is some sort of magically produced list of little miracles, not to me. I am used to knowing things other people don't know. No amount of new age discussion of good vibrations being associated with high energy souls is going to make me forget that the energy of a photon is Planck's constant times its frequency measured in cycles per second, and that a certain amount of energy can lift a certain weight a certain height above the ground or heat a certain amount of water a certain number of degrees.

I am fascinated by meaning, and by meaning I mean purpose and moral good vs bad and so on. I am glad I learned about the ancient greeks at a young age, with their very different idea of excellence as virtue vs modern religious teaching of obsessing over whether you were being bad by not obeying god. And learning the greek gods, it seemed like a bad saturday morning movie it was so funny with their Peloponesian God Swan Love Association and 3-headed pit bulls and so on. It helped immensely to put the bible stories in perspective. We have our myths, they have theirs. I'm guessing, in some sense, they, or at least some of them, BELIEVED their myths, they certainly put a lot of effort into building temples and so on. And we in some sense, or at least some of us, BELIEVED our myths.

And here I was, caught in the middle, being able to see the cartoonishness of it all. And wondering, how does one go meta from here?

Even today you can find intelligent people who wonder: where can right and wrong come from if not from god? Are Right and Wrong even real? It does seem we have a word, nihilism, for the assertion that they are not.

I decided relatively early that right and wrong are more a choice than they are not a choice. "Ah-ha!" said the goddies. "you just stepped on the moral relativism land-mine." But the thing is you can't save yourself from moral relativism by invoking a make-believe god. Fake things can't have real life-changing effects, we don't think.

So I decided I would have my own conclusions about right and wrong, and I would kill to enforce them, and it didn't matter that I didn't have a make believe monster to back up my arrogance.

But the thing is, Goofy, I'm pretty sure you have decided something like that, too. You clearly from all your posts have some pretty complex ideas about what is right and what is wrong, and it seems from the outside you don't have a lot of patience or tolerance for people who disagree with you on those things, which I take it to mean you really think they are real.

Do you ever wonder where you get that from? Where your knowledge of good and evil comes from? Is it just what was coded into you as a child, irretrievably dictating what you would believe as an adult? Is it just the rules of the club you have decided to affiliate with?

In my case it is mostly the rules of the club I have decided to affiliate with, I think. I don't think right and wrong are somehow hard-wired into the structure of the universe, waiting for us to become smart enough and work hard enough to extract a reasonably faithful elucidation of them. And I don't think making up a story about an uber-monster that can make things right and wrong by declaring them, and who also buy the way somehow created the universe anyway as if THAT answers more questions than it raises is helpful. Religious people can have a made up god that answers all their other questions, I just keep the made up stuff (morality) and punt on the question of exactly where it comes from and how I know.

And the whole morass of right and wrong, and the FACT that humans will, especially collectively, make life and death decisions that effect MILLIONS and BILLIONS of people, because we have no choice, even not deciding is a decision when it comes to human morality. We are all moral actors whether we want to be or not. Hah, there's meaning for you. Inescabable moral relevance to your actions.

So yes, I think the idea that god is both the source of the universe and the source of right and wrong and is a conscious being with a personality that likes to pick winners and losers and gets mad and sad when we don't do what he she or they want is, well, a little childish. What better source for understanding some of this than our most ancient texts, the things we chose to preserve when we were incredibly limited in how much we could take with us from generation to generation?

That it is filled with crazy impossible things is part of the answer, it seems.

R:)

It doesn't really matter if 25% of the world or even 95% of the world thinks the bible is some sort of magically produced list of little miracles, not to me.

It will matter to you when that majority starts insisting that you observe what they believe, even if you don't. See: 'Taliban.' See also 'I pledge allegiance ' under God'. No, I am not equating the two, but I am pointing out the similarities. Unfortunately is has been thus throughout human history; the whole of Britain 'changed religion' when King Henry VIII decided they should; the whole of the Roman Empire did the same when Constantine had a random dream one night. People have been enforcing - and killing each other - religion for thousands of years, so no, I don't like it, particularly when there is absolutely no evidence that any one has any better hold on truth than another. (Also see: Akentaten, etc.)

Where your knowledge of good and evil comes from?

No, not really. I have had religionists challenge me with that question, and I like the meme 'If you have to be a good person under threat from God, then you are not a good person to start with.' I believe everyone except the psychologically damaged (psychopaths, sociopaths, etc.) knows the difference inherently, even when doing 'not good' things. I knew shoplifting was bad when I did it as a teenager, but it is with age and wisdom that I now understand honesty is the best policy. That does not mean I don't understand grifters, cheats, and the like - I also understand the dark side of humanity (unfortunately.)

and it seems from the outside that you don't have a lot of patience or tolerance for people who disagree with you

It depends. I enjoy debate. I have little problem with people who disagree, but I ask that they respect facts. If they do not, then yes, I have no time for them. I also recognize that people can have different opinions on some moral issues (abortion, for instance) and I can understand why 'the sanctity of life' argument holds sway with some. I do not respect those who claim they know this because 'God', nor if they are unwilling to listen to my argument on the other side. (That is just one example, obviously.)

But mostly I have spent too many years asking for evidence without a single, solitary thing offered except goat-herder tales, rote childhood indoctrination, or similar. There are 3 billion video cameras on the planet. Where is the evidence? 'Jesus on toast' is a miracle? At every turn the Bible has been shown to be ridiculous, yet it persists. Bah. Time for the human race to grow up.

I have had religionists challenge me with that question, and I like the meme 'If you have to be a good person under threat from God, then you are not a good person to start with.' I believe everyone except the psychologically damaged (psychopaths, sociopaths, etc.) knows the difference inherently

I am not saying you are wrong about any of this. But I would like to point out that you are just trotting out another inherently unprovable moral theory, and saying THIS ONE as if you read it in the bible or something. So the answer to the question of how can you tell something is right or wrong is, we have to ask Goofy how he FEELS. Its a fine theory, but not really any finer than the Taliban or the nihilists, in a logical sense. I admit I don't have a better theory, but I feel as though its valuable to understand that nobody does. My solution to Moral Relativism, by the way, is to not say on the one hand it is all relative, then say on the other hand, therefore we don't get to defend our faith aggressively because we realize it is not real. Our faith in our system is as real as the beliefs that are a threat to us, and it would be a sad world indeed in which knowing the truth made you powerless.

Anyway, I think the bible stories actually help elucidate how it came to be that we feel morally how we do. I think it is from culture we get our feelings about right and wrong, and that culture evolves (memetically) and that western culture is as good a bet as any there ever was as being a good one for humans, so why not defend it aggressively. I think the predecessor to culture is the emotional brain of the mammal, and that as we are all social creatures, our emotions drive us to be able to cooperate with others, and this is the starting point of our moral feelings. I think the layer of culture on top of this which is memetic and evolves as ideas instead of DNA is a creation of the primates, perhaps not all of them, but the ones that became us, and that it has pretty spectacularly sped things up, for better or for worse. I think the bible is an artifact like a fossil from which we can learn about the earliest part of memetic evolution of humans that became western civilization, and that makes it incredibly interesting.

But mostly I have spent too many years asking for evidence without a single, solitary thing offered except goat-herder tales, rote childhood indoctrination, or similar. There are 3 billion video cameras on the planet. Where is the evidence? 'Jesus on toast' is a miracle? At every turn the Bible has been shown to be ridiculous, yet it persists. Bah. Time for the human race to grow up.

May I suggest, if this is true, that you have been taking an overly naive approach? There is plenty of "evidence" about the bible, about who wrote it, how the stories evolved over time, what the background human situation at the time these things were being created or modified or forgered. Of course, not too remarkably, there is very little evidence that the stories are true. Out of curiosity, did you reject Plato when you went to Greece and couldn't find his cave? Or his perfect city?

As a perhaps interesting aside, there came a point in my own atheism where I had learned at least some about Buddhism and Zen, that I realized it was not so much that I didn't believe in God, as that I didn't believe in a Judeo-Christian supernatural being who had a largely human-like personality and liked to pick winners and losers and seemed somewhat OCD about what it was OK to eat or not eat.

Is the universe an amoral place? Well, it seems it is possible for moral relevance to be a thing (us) that can be created through evolution within our universe. I'm a Physicist, not a Metaphysicisist, so I am not sure, but I think if we can build somehting moral here there is something about the universe itself that is interesting that we do not yet have a clue about. Yes the angry god was something we just made up to explain this, but isn't that an interesting thing to know about ourselves, that this is how we first try to explain things before we realize science?

Anyway, I think the bible stories actually help elucidate how it came to be that we feel morally how we do. I think it is from culture we get our feelings about right and wrong, and that culture evolves (memetically) and that western culture is as good a bet as any there ever was as being a good one for humans, so why not defend it aggressively.

Because it has so many *bad* lessons, and for reasons too obvious to list (/Leviticus), we are unable to change them in any reasonable time frame. (I note the Old Testament underwent its first and last revision almost 2,000 years ago and there are people still studying how many pieces of silver you have to pay a father to rape his daughter.)

I am not saying all of the Bible is evil, but it's clear that most of it is nonsense babble, used as a cudgel by bullies to enforce their own peculiar wants. From 'No celebration of Christmas' to 'have an orgy of consumerism at Christmas', it's all been justified by the very same book. (See: Slavery. Women's equality. Etc)

And I am bothered by the 'western culture' is as good as there ever was. Western culture has done some horrific things (genocides too numerous to mention, for instance), but then so have middle-Eastern and Asian cultures; endemic to humans, apparently. It's turned out well, if you narrow your focus to today. If you were in China when Europeans were killing each other, maybe not. Or if you were in the MidEast pursuing math, algebra, chemistry and more while the Western countries were dying of plague, also maybe not. Those areas descended into darkness for a good while, the MidEast still under the influence of religion and Abraham.

Yes, I love it here, now, but I watch as ignorant rubes hold the Bible and decide how our civilization ought be organized - and they have a power that is hard to match. The book of fairy tales may have served a purpose long, long ago, but it's time for an update - a really really serious one - and I see that nowhere on the horizon.

many years ago, this made its way around the internet and since it seems to be appropriate to this discussion, i thought it might be enjoyable to post it here for any who hadn't seem it. : >)

all the best,

mike

Below is a brilliant and humorous response to the notion that the

bible is the ultimate justification for any conflicting viewpoint in this day and age.

Owning A Canadian.

On her radio show, Dr Laura Schlesinger said that, as an observant

Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus

18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance.

The following response is an open letter to Dr. Laura, written by a U.S.

man, and posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as informative:

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I

have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that

knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend

the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that

Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination ... End of

debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other

elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and

female, provided they are from neighboring nations. A friend of mine

claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians.

Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in

Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair

price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in

her period of Menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15: 19-24.

The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women

take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates

a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors.

They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus

35:2 clearly states he should be put to death.

Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police

to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an

abomination, Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality.

I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I

have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses.

Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair

around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.

19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes

me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two

different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing

garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend).

He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary

that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to

stone them? Lev.24:10-16.

Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like

we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy

considerable expertise in such matters, so I'm confident you can

help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and

unchanging.


Your adoring fan,

James M. Kauffman, Ed.D. Professor Emeritus, Dept. Of Curriculum,

Instruction, and Special Education University of Virginia


P.S. It would be a damn shame if we couldn't own a Canadian.

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.