Surpeme Court Gay Marriage Cases....

[Kidlicious]

Seriously. You asked me where I was getting it from. I say the Catechism. You argue that this cannot be true. I prove that this is so. Then you say, "well that is stupid".

Then you turn around and lie, after I already proved it to be part of what the Catholic church teaches by attributing the interpretation to me and me alone.

So, yeah, you do care.

I didn't lie *******. That's your interpretation. You got it from your church. NO one gives a ****.

[Ben Kenobi]

I didn't lie *******.

Yes, yes you did. Look. You are wrong about this, why don't you just admit you were wrong?

[Sava]

Also - how do you plan to get information from me to you after I am dead?

Don't get so hung up on the details.

[Kidlicious]

Yes, yes you did. Look. You are wrong about this, why don't you just admit you were wrong?

Tell me again, what is your interpretation, moron.

[Ben Kenobi]

Don't get so hung up on the details.

Seems like your plan isn't so hot.

I think you'd better come up with another one.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Bury a cellphone with you?

[Ben Kenobi]

What plan allows you to contact heaven?

[Berzerker]

finding the ark

[MrFun]

Don't get so hung up on the details.

[Ming]

Studies show that the surest way to start out poor is to grow up in a broken home. So yeah. I'm an evil capitalist. I want people to get rich and well off and where they get there is by getting married and staying married.

So just to be sure... You are saying that it should be illegal for poor people to get married. Because if you stand by your argument that it's all about the kids, and that rich people's kids are better off than poor people's kids, then poor people shouldn't be allowed to be married.

[MrFun]

If Ben wants American law to be based on theology/religion, I would think he would also advocate for prohibiting straight people who are atheists from getting married.

[MichaeltheGreat]

So does everything else.

Good, so you don't dispute their unreliability.

Other than the fact that the Gospels contain historical evidence about this period in the Mideast that has been shown through outside evidence to be accurate, refers to real places and people and things throughout?

So does all historical fiction. You think they were going to put everyone in "A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away?" One of the best ways to gain credibility among the simple minded is to cloak a little editorial license here, a little spin there, a little of the author's dogma over there, with a generally accurate background. Schliemann was able to use the Iliad to identify multiple sites. It doesn't mean the story is accurate in all details, or even most, it means the author was familiary with the major geography and current events of the period.

If you read the Gospel account, does it appear to you that Pilate is at all vacillating? I don't see that. He's willing to condemn a man that he believes to be innocent to death on the word of the Jewish High Priests.

Certainly he's vacilating. He questions Jesus guilt, he offers to set him free, the whole washing hands story. In normal practice, a Roman prefect would, in effect say, "Sure, whatever... next!" and not give a **** less. Also, given Pilate seemed (from multiple accounts and references to his being summoned back to Rome) to delight in ****ing with the Jews and pissing them off - the banners and standards in Jerusalem, the shields in the temple, etc. So why not just say "sorry, can't find a reason to do it" and let Jesus go piss off the high priests some more? Then let them riot a bit and have a mass crucifixion, as Pilate reputedly did with the Samaritan protest?

Did it serve the benefit of Pilate to 'wash his hands of the matter?' Absolutely. When his agenda and the agenda of the High Priests coincided, why would Pilate deviate from it?

Pilate was a prefect and really had no reason whatsoever to go along with the high priests' agenda. Nor as a lesser Roman governor, would he have any agenda other than getting what he could while he could.

[MichaeltheGreat]

What plan allows you to contact heaven?

You won't be there in any event. Since most cell providers are the spawn of Satan and their plans hellish, I'm sure reaching you will be no problem.

[Ben Kenobi]

Good, so you don't dispute their unreliability.

If you're willing to concede this point - you've conceded that the relative unreliability is much less for the Gospels than for everything else. Are you *sure* this is the argument you want take?

So does all historical fiction.

Is there anything to indicate that the Gospel authors intended their work to be understood as historical fiction?

One of the best ways to gain credibility among the simple minded is to cloak a little editorial license here, a little spin there, a little of the author's dogma over there, with a generally accurate background. Schliemann was able to use the Iliad to identify multiple sites. It doesn't mean the story is accurate in all details, or even most, it means the author was familiary with the major geography and current events of the period.

What it does mean is that the Iliad is a historical source and one of the best ones for that particular period (for which we have the Iliad), and pretty much nothing else.

Certainly he's vacilating. He questions Jesus guilt, he offers to set him free, the whole washing hands story.

Does it suggest to you that he intends to let Jesus go - or that this is a plot to ensure that he gets executed while at the same time currying favour with the Jews? If you could kill two birds with one stone would you? Pilate kills 3.

One, he gets rid of Christ.
Two, he appeases the Jewish High Priests
Three, he manages to evade responsibility for the execution.

Also, given Pilate seemed (from multiple accounts and references to his being summoned back to Rome) to delight in ****ing with the Jews and pissing them off - the banners and standards in Jerusalem, the shields in the temple, etc. So why not just say "sorry, can't find a reason to do it" and let Jesus go piss off the high priests some more? Then let them riot a bit and have a mass crucifixion, as Pilate reputedly did with the Samaritan protest?

What better way to **** over the Jews by getting the Jews themselves to execute a popular street preacher with a broad following? If your goal is to cause dissention among the Jews - wouldn't this be the way to do it?

Pilate was a prefect and really had no reason whatsoever to go along with the high priests' agenda. Nor as a lesser Roman governor, would he have any agenda other than getting what he could while he could.

Not the point. Pilate could fulfill his own agenda without deviating from it and appease the High Priests at the same time. What cost is it to have a token appeasement when it costs you nothing.

[Ben Kenobi]

So just to be sure... You are saying that it should be illegal for poor people to get married. Because if you stand by your argument that it's all about the kids, and that rich people's kids are better off than poor people's kids, then poor people shouldn't be allowed to be married.

I'm arguing just the opposite. All poor people should get married because getting married is the best ticket out of poverty.