Posts for: Iliamna1
Mar 14, 2022 08:55:04 #
(Main)
Strictly speaking, the Bible only allows for a one male- one female marriage and any sex outside those parameters is either adultery or fornication.
Mar 13, 2022 19:09:50 #
(Main)
[quote=robertv3]The earlier post referred to 3 presidents, but after reading I can see that the above reply is about Lincoln.
I had never heard such a thing (and I can see why -- the schools of my time wouldn't want it known). I think it's believable though, because people in earlier times (even Lincoln) didn't know what we know now.
Assuming Lincoln said that, I'm disappointed. Yes it is r****t. But no, I would not call him a "huge" r****t, because I make an allowance for his ignorance, and for his being a product of his times, and for him having to function within the society in which he existed (even if he were wiser and less ignorant).
So, after assuming he gave that r****t speech, what's left of Lincoln to admire? This: Within that same speech are included these remarks: "My understanding is that I can just let her alone." "[I]t seems to me quite possible for us to get along without making either s***es or wives of negroes." Those remarks by themselves are good, maybe even laudable for his time or taken in context. He also says he will "stand by the law of this State", which is a reasonable thing for him to say (though I think the law was bad). He also said, in the same speech, this sentence which is half good: "I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied every thing." The good part is that the negro would not necessarily have to be denied some things. These excerpts from his speech indicate that Lincoln is far better than the people who would ens***e, persecute, or arbitrarily deny rights to others. These factors are worth a lot, and put him at a higher moral footing than many people of today.
So in my opinion the speech shows he had a lot of ignorance (about negroes, anyway) but had the good moral sense to let negroes alone rather than to abuse them (while so many other people of his time were abusing them). This good moral sense (which is worth a lot even in a state of ignorance) is one of the things that made Lincoln a good president for his time. That's my opinion. But if you could ask Lincoln himself about it, he'd probably say that he didn't think much about race and was more interested in other things such as keeping the union together. And that's also true.[/quote]
There are several good biographies that chronicled his youth. As a young man, the state law required him to live at his parent's home until he reached 23 (as I recall, but could have been 23). He resented his father hiring him and keeping his wages, much like a s***e. After he reached the legal age to leave and was able to work and save for himself, he traveled down to the s***e states and observed that nearly all the w****s were poor and could not compete with the s***es who essentially worked for free for their 'masters' and were abused on so many levels. He returned north with the knowledge that s***ery was evil and needed to be abolished.
A lot of education took place after that journey, but the main platform of the newly-formed Republican Party was to abolish s***ery and Lincoln was the first Republican president. Perfect? In no way. but certainly opposed to s***ery, and that was a start.
I'd like to add that EVERYONE evolves from their youth upward in response to our parents, our education, our circumstances, the news, our exposure to other peoples and we all , I hope, are vastly kinder as a result.
I had never heard such a thing (and I can see why -- the schools of my time wouldn't want it known). I think it's believable though, because people in earlier times (even Lincoln) didn't know what we know now.
Assuming Lincoln said that, I'm disappointed. Yes it is r****t. But no, I would not call him a "huge" r****t, because I make an allowance for his ignorance, and for his being a product of his times, and for him having to function within the society in which he existed (even if he were wiser and less ignorant).
So, after assuming he gave that r****t speech, what's left of Lincoln to admire? This: Within that same speech are included these remarks: "My understanding is that I can just let her alone." "[I]t seems to me quite possible for us to get along without making either s***es or wives of negroes." Those remarks by themselves are good, maybe even laudable for his time or taken in context. He also says he will "stand by the law of this State", which is a reasonable thing for him to say (though I think the law was bad). He also said, in the same speech, this sentence which is half good: "I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied every thing." The good part is that the negro would not necessarily have to be denied some things. These excerpts from his speech indicate that Lincoln is far better than the people who would ens***e, persecute, or arbitrarily deny rights to others. These factors are worth a lot, and put him at a higher moral footing than many people of today.
So in my opinion the speech shows he had a lot of ignorance (about negroes, anyway) but had the good moral sense to let negroes alone rather than to abuse them (while so many other people of his time were abusing them). This good moral sense (which is worth a lot even in a state of ignorance) is one of the things that made Lincoln a good president for his time. That's my opinion. But if you could ask Lincoln himself about it, he'd probably say that he didn't think much about race and was more interested in other things such as keeping the union together. And that's also true.[/quote]
There are several good biographies that chronicled his youth. As a young man, the state law required him to live at his parent's home until he reached 23 (as I recall, but could have been 23). He resented his father hiring him and keeping his wages, much like a s***e. After he reached the legal age to leave and was able to work and save for himself, he traveled down to the s***e states and observed that nearly all the w****s were poor and could not compete with the s***es who essentially worked for free for their 'masters' and were abused on so many levels. He returned north with the knowledge that s***ery was evil and needed to be abolished.
A lot of education took place after that journey, but the main platform of the newly-formed Republican Party was to abolish s***ery and Lincoln was the first Republican president. Perfect? In no way. but certainly opposed to s***ery, and that was a start.
I'd like to add that EVERYONE evolves from their youth upward in response to our parents, our education, our circumstances, the news, our exposure to other peoples and we all , I hope, are vastly kinder as a result.
Mar 13, 2022 16:07:37 #
(Main)
[quote=Ronald Hatt]**
**Texas A & M....{ A, & M...stands for #Assinine morons! } :O{{{
What else could it be? ? ? ? ?
How could A-Morality, [ Clinton}....Criminality, Biden, & Cl;inton,....even some Obama}.....& ignorance { Carter}....be ranked so high?
..... 
[/quote]
It HAS to be an Aggie joke. It just has to be. Please, Lord, let it be a good, old-fashioned Texas Aggie joke. Iliamna (a Longhorn graduate)
**Texas A & M....{ A, & M...stands for #Assinine morons! } :O{{{
What else could it be? ? ? ? ?
How could A-Morality, [ Clinton}....Criminality, Biden, & Cl;inton,....even some Obama}.....& ignorance { Carter}....be ranked so high?
..... [/quote]It HAS to be an Aggie joke. It just has to be. Please, Lord, let it be a good, old-fashioned Texas Aggie joke. Iliamna (a Longhorn graduate)
Mar 13, 2022 00:42:35 #
(Main)
James I:13 - 15 Says it all. "No one is to say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted [n]by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone. But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust. Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it has run its course, brings forth death."
The only solution IS the Blood of our Lord Jesus.
Jesus, being the only perfect, sinless human AND God (called the hypostatic union), is able to do this. He stated "I am the Way, the T***h, and the Life and no man comes to the Father except by Me."
No good works by any person ever earned him a place in Heaven: Only by believing that Christ died and paid the penalty for your sin will work. John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten So, that whosoever should believe on Him, will have life everlasting."
The only solution IS the Blood of our Lord Jesus.
Jesus, being the only perfect, sinless human AND God (called the hypostatic union), is able to do this. He stated "I am the Way, the T***h, and the Life and no man comes to the Father except by Me."
No good works by any person ever earned him a place in Heaven: Only by believing that Christ died and paid the penalty for your sin will work. John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten So, that whosoever should believe on Him, will have life everlasting."
Mar 12, 2022 13:52:02 #
(Main)
8/4/20 The Hill:
Book claims Trump barred Epstein from Mar-a-Lago after financier hit on member's teen daughter
© Getty Images
A new book written by a group of Miami Herald journalists claims that President Trump barred disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein from his private club in Palm Beach, Fla., years ago following an incident with another club member's teenage daughter.
"The Grifter’s Club," released Tuesday, asserts that Epstein was a member of Trump's club until 2007, when he was banned for hitting on another member's daughter. Co-author Nicholas Nehamas told the paper that records show Epstein's account at the club was closed in October 2007.
Trump has previously referenced a falling out with Epstein, who was facing sex trafficking charges before he k**led himself in prison last year. The president had said last year that he was "not a fan" of Epstein and "threw him out" of Mar-a-Lago, Trump's longtime resort that now doubles as his official residence. The president also said they hadn't spoken in 15 years.
Book claims Trump barred Epstein from Mar-a-Lago after financier hit on member's teen daughter
© Getty Images
A new book written by a group of Miami Herald journalists claims that President Trump barred disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein from his private club in Palm Beach, Fla., years ago following an incident with another club member's teenage daughter.
"The Grifter’s Club," released Tuesday, asserts that Epstein was a member of Trump's club until 2007, when he was banned for hitting on another member's daughter. Co-author Nicholas Nehamas told the paper that records show Epstein's account at the club was closed in October 2007.
Trump has previously referenced a falling out with Epstein, who was facing sex trafficking charges before he k**led himself in prison last year. The president had said last year that he was "not a fan" of Epstein and "threw him out" of Mar-a-Lago, Trump's longtime resort that now doubles as his official residence. The president also said they hadn't spoken in 15 years.
Mar 11, 2022 22:33:17 #
(Main)
To assure less e******n f***d and c***ting, NOT BIGGER GOVERNMENT. You really need to read the bill.
Mar 11, 2022 22:12:23 #
(Main)
RascalRiley wrote:
Because fear and h**e are being stoked against them by Christians. Gays are sinners according to some Christians. DeSantis is moving to increase control. He is in favour of more government, not less
Your bias and ignorance is showing. I live in Florida and the bill has been explained well by others on this post, so I won;t repeat it. DeSantis is not moving toward more government control . . . the schools were by usurping the parent's rights in the sex education of the children. DeSantis isn't in favor of more government control, but is in favor of limiting what the school districts can teach the children that is contrary to parental rights.
And, yes, gays are sinners. So are straight people. The sad state of affairs is that we all are sinners (For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of the Lord). The solution is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. He bore the burden of every person's sin on the cross. The difference between Christians and non-Christians, is that they're forgiven. And i see a lot of fear and h**e stoked by progressives against Christians.
Mar 11, 2022 17:28:30 #
(Main)
Simple Sam wrote:
Could you TRY to follow a thread? My comment was ... (show quote)
I AM, following te thread. I maintain you have stinking thinking to wish the same fate on anyone. Period. I'm a white, retired RN and had to deal with various minorities on a busy post-op floor and was accused of being r****t and called some filthy names. But I never punched any of them in the face (although there was one person I really, really wanted to), and several had to be fired. But their behavior was well-documented by others.
Perhaps anger management needs to be taught in the schools or as part of employee orientation.
Mar 11, 2022 16:31:46 #
(Main)
Simple Sam wrote:
okay, I sure hope you father, grandfather, uncle, wife or child never is punched once and suffers brain injury or death.
And I hope this doesn't happen to ANYONE, regardless of race, color, creed, etc. What an awful thing to say! To anyone. You need to gey a real life. You have STINKING THINKING.
Mar 11, 2022 16:19:55 #
(Main)
Marty 2020 wrote:
Absolutely!
I’m on the narrow path with “few”, thanks to Jesus!
I’m on the narrow path with “few”, thanks to Jesus!
Some of my favorite verses are:John 3:16 thru 18: “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish, but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but so that the world might be saved through Him. 18 The one who believes in Him is not judged; the one who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God."
EphL2, 8-10: "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them."
Mar 11, 2022 13:39:28 #
(Main)
RascalRiley wrote:
But it is ok that Donny was friends with Epstein?
Trump in 2002
“I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy,” Trump told New York Magazine that year for a story headlined “Jeffrey Epstein: International Moneyman of Mystery.” “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”
Trump in 2002
“I’ve known Jeff for fifteen years. Terrific guy,” Trump told New York Magazine that year for a story headlined “Jeffrey Epstein: International Moneyman of Mystery.” “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it — Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”
Please note that 'Donny' had Epstein thrown out of Mara Lago after he made an inappropriate advance on some young woman, and never had anything to do with him after.
Mar 11, 2022 13:36:00 #
(Main)
[quote=Iliamna1]And if I were so inclined, I could come up with an equal or LONGER list for DEMOCRATS who have also displayed such issues, including our current intrepid president and his son. So what's your point? Oh! and what about Bath-house Barry? Or what about the extensive list of unexplained deaths, murders and suicides surrounding the Clintons? Or even former president Clinton's affairs and alleged trips to Pedo Island with Epstein? Be care before slinging mud. I also have a very good memory of your calling all WHITE women whores (and I assure you, a few are, but most are NOT). I think what you write is a good sampling of the thoughts you have about the world as whole, much of what is not rooted in reality.
Mar 11, 2022 13:28:49 #
(Main)
[quote=PeterS]
And if I were so inclined, I could come up with an equal or LONGER list for DEMOCRATS who have also displayed such jissues, including our curreny initrepid president and his son. So what's your point? Oh! and what aboiut Bath-house Barry? Or what about the extennsive list of unexpklained deaths, murders and suicides surroiunding the Clintons? Or even former poresident Clinktoiln's affairs and alkleged trips witih Epsstein? Be care beffor slinginkg mud. I also hoiave a very good memory of your calling all WHITE
AuntiE wrote:
br Good thing the Republican party is so squeaky ... (show quote)
And if I were so inclined, I could come up with an equal or LONGER list for DEMOCRATS who have also displayed such jissues, including our curreny initrepid president and his son. So what's your point? Oh! and what aboiut Bath-house Barry? Or what about the extennsive list of unexpklained deaths, murders and suicides surroiunding the Clintons? Or even former poresident Clinktoiln's affairs and alkleged trips witih Epsstein? Be care beffor slinginkg mud. I also hoiave a very good memory of your calling all WHITE
Mar 11, 2022 03:41:35 #
(Main)
River Reb wrote:
Did not the punch cause him to fall backwards and hit his head??
Probably, but the punch likely didn't k**l him. Hitting his head did lead to his death. There is nothing in the article stating Cook received a fractured jaw. I agree, the use of inflammatory names is egregious, but is still simply emotionally hurtful words and we should ALL be more circumspect in our use of name-calling. There is no excuse to call B****s the "N" word, or W****s "C*****rs and "Karen" or to insult any other person based on their color, ethnicity or other factors. But, again, name-calling doesn't elevate itself to (nor should it) the level of violence or striking someone.. I still think the sentence was fair. I do not believe the young man INTENTIONALLY k**led Mr Cook. He looks pretty frightened in the police photo and I'm sure he regrets hitting him. In a moment of pique, his life is now in a shambles. Sad article on many levels.
Mar 10, 2022 14:00:31 #
(Main)
In the bink of an eye simply means that . . .a very short span of time, probably less than a second..