Justin Bieber: Drug Addict, Twink, Murderer — A Role Model?
How to begin an article about a flamboyant twink man-boy who parades around onstage with the tenacity of Liberace all Popper’d up; a young man-boy who disrespects elected officials enough to wear overalls to a state event, who entices millions of young (often unnattractive) women into wanting his tiny man-spear thrust inside their womb, injecting them with the Lord’s baby batter and creating an unspeakable legion of idiotic cretins?
This is how you begin –
JUSTIN BIEBER IS A POT SMOKING, DRUG ADDICTED MURDEROUS SOCIOPATH.
Justin Bieber smokes marijuana, aka “pot” aka “weed” aka “herb” aka “grass” aka “weed pot” aka “dank.” He takes a “hit” every chance he gets and get high, to create horrible auto-tuned music that makes girls drop out of school and experiment with sexual things, like “dildos.”
DID YOU KNOW?: Justin Bieber is responsible for an 89% increase in broken hymens, essentially ruining the holy sacred temples (the womb) that the Lord created and urged to remain intact until marriage? When girls hear Bieber’s music, they disregard this Biblical mandate, instead opting to “snap into a Slim Jim” and break their hymens. Bieber, if convicted, could face ONE MILLION YEARS in jail for the forced sexual intercourse his music creates.
Justin Bieber is also a murderer. Recently, the very presence of his automobile (the TwinkMobile) caused a young, aspiring family man and part-time photographer to DIE while attempting to obtain a picture of said automobile. The “TwinkMobile” claimed another man, this time not in the homosexual way in which Bieber is accustomed.
When confronted with this tragedy, Bieber didn’t apologize, instead deflecting the blame onto the photographer, and then going off to smoke on some marijuana cigarettes.
Bieber, “grieving” over the death he caused by smoking a giant marijuana cigar blunt, which is often mixed with PCP.
Justin Bieber is a horrible, horrible role model, a drug user, and a homosexual gay. His fans, “Beliebers” are the most uneducated, idiotic group of desperate fans in the world. They hang on every word that falls from the Lil Twink’s mouth, delusional beyond logical explanation. They think that Justin Bieber CARES about them, and isn’t preoccupied on when his next hit or toke will come, and how he will spend his time on the “Bait Bus.”
FACT: Justin Bieber causes his fans to do dumb things, like mutilate themselves. His fans recently launched a “Cut For Bieber” Twitter campaign, where they encourage one another to cut their limbs in a Gothic, Marilyn Manson fashion in order to “show support” for getting Bieber to stop sucking on bongs.
Let’s end this Justin Bieber nonsense once and for all. Please write your local congressman and encourage him or her to BAN Bieber from performing in your area. This will save our women from wanting his seed, and men from dressing like this dim-wit imbecile.
Mark E. Figs is a licensed Marijuana destroyer and decorated street performer. His recent one-man show “BIG NUTS” sold out four consecutive months at a small theater in Chicago.
- Sinful
- Suspicious
- Scared
- Sad
- Amused
- Laughing Out Loud
Author: Mark E. Figs
Mark is an award-winning children's author, and Christian Conspiracy Theorist can be found on Facebook and Twitter -- (Mark E. Figs)
10:46 pm
Is Justin Beeber even American? I demand to see her birth certificate.
Praise or Condemn:
7 
0
11:05 pm
Justin Beiber is Canadain. A reporter die when RUNNING ACROSS THE FREEWAY thinking that Justing Beiber was on the other side. When he found out that he wasn’t, he ran back across and was killed. Justin Beiber had no part in the death. The moral of the story is: DON’T RUN ACROSS THE FREEWAY LOOKING FOR JUSTING BEIBER.
Justing Beiber, (yep it’s Beiber not beeber, brain-trust) said he was sorry but, why not just leave him his privacy?
He does not cause sexual deviation in young girls and to my knowledge has not had premarital sex.
He’s also straight.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
1
11:06 pm
Justing Beiber? Oh man, that was a typo.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:26 pm
I just noticed all my spelling errors.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:09 pm
I just noticed all my errors*
Twinked for ya
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:53 pm
I just noticed all my errors*
Twinked for ya
What the…?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:27 pm
It’s his not her, genius. Give me your evidence that he is a girl. You obviously either wnt to be annoying or look dull.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
4:02 pm
this keyboard has big problems.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:07 pm
You have even bigger problems, average. Starting with your general awareness of the world around you.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:46 am
You do realize he is Canadian you know the only reason we hate Canada that and Carly Rae Jepsen and twink also means another thing besides you know what I can’t find a specific definition it is also Dutch Russian or British slang for fix I call call some engineer friends twinks and they know what I mean
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:27 am
I don’t understand the hate for him, it’s his fans I can’t stand
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
7:29 pm
What is wrong with his fans?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:51 pm
Cutting for Bieber. enough said.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
7:52 pm
Enough said…That isn’t ALL of his fans though…Right? I hope so.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:33 pm
I can’t stand his music how videos are dare I say fuel
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
4:47 am
I can not seem to reply to your boobies comment so here I am gay but BUT I have a weakness for Russian women I don’t feel like moving to Russia and they are rare around the the USA so I tend to date German men and stay away from the British accent I find it ugly and I hate the lisp oh and I date Romanian men net best thing to a Russian not the same accent but close enough now if I had to choose between male or female Russian it would be male if she was a redhead female oh look I’m rambling well I’m off truskev
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:13 am
well that makes a lot of sense
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:46 pm
No he is from Canada…French-Canada at that.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
6:50 pm
I will beleive your sentiment towards Justin Bieber if you can prove it to me. Everybody who is aware of the world around them knows the truth about Justin Bieber. He is straight and he is a guy. Plain and simple. He even claims to be a Christian.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:10 pm
He has been spending time with a rapper called lil’ twist, however, who some people say might be having a negative influence on him, though. There are some unconfirmed images of him [Justin Bieber] smoking a substance that appears to be weed. That’s the only negative thing I can say, other than that he has a pretty clean public image. The accusation of being a killer by Mr. Figs is TOTALLY false and maybe slightly *highly* demented.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:14 pm
Average, let’s pray together that Jesus will help Justin to resist the temptation to put a fat, juicy blunt in his mouth again. I’ll be praying around 7:30 PST. Will you join me then, Christ brother?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
3:43 am
Fat juicy blunt ? You ever smoked before
I mean when I think fat and juicy I think steak cock and a Russian women breasts hmm and a strawberry not sure why
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:31 am
Smoking is a very dry and irritating thing.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
7:29 pm
Gross.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:32 pm
To reply I meant a blunt I have smoked one did not get high off it then I never did it again
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:29 am
do gay men like boobies?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:50 pm
Is that even a good question. Is it even an appropriate subject? Methinks not.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:15 pm
Yeah, actually, I will do that. I will try, but I go to bed late, not early. I pray at anywhere between 9:45 and 11:00.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:07 pm
Praise! I think it worked!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:06 pm
Time will tell.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:36 pm
Eric here I have something for you
http://www.tube8.com/gay/fetish/his-rock-hard-cock-wants-to-bust/7265161/HAHAHAHAHA
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
6:48 am
You would know I mean being in that all boy band back in the 80s when all that taking off each other shirts and what not.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:40 am
He is straight until I brake him
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:30 pm
What do you mean?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:15 pm
follow me to the gay bath house.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:06 pm
Are you gay?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
6:51 pm
only if the pay is good.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:37 pm
That can’t mean anything good.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:31 pm
it means I’m willing to sell my body for material gain.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:20 pm
I-I don’t even…Are you brain damaged?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:22 pm
it means I’m willing to sell my body for material gain…And that sure isn’t good. I see why you call yourself a terrible example. Well, everybody, including me, has their personal problems I guess.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:56 pm
I live to serve
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:49 pm
You should really try to stop…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:30 pm
Breaking a straight guy is to make him gay by making him like gay sex it’s why it’s called breaking you break their sexuality
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:41 pm
And I know Erich is going to respond tO me with ” I knew gays where trying to make people gay” it’s just a joke and sometimes we actually do it but its a joke as in we want to f*xk them that badly
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:38 pm
We?…
???
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:53 pm
Isn’t “homosexual gay” a little redundant?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:48 pm
It’s like saying the same thing twice.
BTW, I just started listening to BVB. What are their best songs? What do you think is their best album?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:15 pm
“it’s like saying the same thing twice”
The irony, I can’t stop laughing now!
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
10:40 pm
Laughing out Loud!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:38 pm
Seriously stop doing that its just wrong it’s like A lisp I hate lisps
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:34 pm
Oh it annoys you? I’ll be sure to stop then.
Laughing out loud rolling on the floor!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:44 pm
Leave jesse alone. If he doesn’t like it don’t do it. That’s what Jesus would do.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
8:05 pm
My name is not even Jesse its actually roman I just use Jesse because my last name fits the name
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:15 pm
Average: “If he doesn’t like it don’t do it.”
I don’t like any of your posts so stop posting on here. They are annoying.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
6:23 pm
YOU are annoying.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:51 pm
That’s not Christlike. Go try to live out your faith for real. Don’t be part of the problem.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:06 pm
Jesus would leave people with sinful lifestyles alone instead of forcing them and insulting them for it.
You don’t seem to care much about doing that.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:44 pm
Considering you are an Atheist, as far as I can tell, that is a wise thing to say, L.N.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:06 pm
Jesus would tell then the truth about their sin. He would never not warn anyone one about where their choices would lead them. Learn some more about Jesus and until then, don’t act like you know what he would do.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:25 pm
Just because he is an athiest doesn’t mean that he is an expert on Christianity. Why athiests get this air of superiority and improved awareness of the world, I will never know.
Like he knows what Jesus would say or do. Jesus is no liberal. No way.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:35 am
@Average: Not all atheists have an “air of superiority”… Some of us try not too… I don’t think anyone’s entitled to say what Jesus would say or do… I believe that everyone’s just as in the dark about than the next guy… But that might just be my thought process…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:47 pm
I thought that Oddathiest hadn’t decided whether he was an athiest or not. He seems to have made the wrong choice…What a pity.
You should think about it some more. I would love to hear any of your questions or anything like that.
This site is dedicated to answering all of those questions athiest have about God. It’s well worth a good look.
http://www.godandscience.org/
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:48 pm
ATHIESTS!!!…Idiot. Spelling fail.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:16 am
it doesn’t matter what he chooses. Odd Atheist is on a righteous path whether he knows it or not
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:28 pm
it doesn’t matter what he chooses. Odd Atheist is on a righteous path whether he knows it or not…That may or may not be true. At a minimum, how on earth would apricot know? Thean again, he/she guessed how old I was. You really don’t know if someone is heading the right way. It’s a fine line, I’m sure.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:40 am
“Just because he is an athiest doesn’t mean that he is an expert on Christianity.”
You haven’t read the bible, and any time you do, you cherry pick whatever is convenient for you at the time. You don’t look at the bible the way that sane people do, nor do you think about the context of things the way sane people do. You go ‘oh, everyone should be forced to follow these beliefs or else they should be harassed’ instead of ‘I’m content with my beliefs and I’m more concerned about being a good person’. You have to be bribed to be a good person, how sad is that? And even then you’re following some pretty sh.itty instructions.
“Why athiests get this air of superiority and improved awareness of the world, I will never know.”
Air of superiority? Only if you think yourself inferior. Improved awareness of the world? Really it’s standard (though I suppose when you look up from the bottom of the barrel, everything is better).
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:43 pm
So, I don’t look at the Bible the way sane people do. Sane? What is YOUR defin tion of sane?
The dictionary defintion of sane is:
1.The ability to think and behave in a normal and rational manner; sound mental health.
2.Reasonable and rational behavior
That’s the average Christian alright…And the average athiest, too.
BTW, saying that all athiests have an improved awareness of the world is not a proper generalization and is completely unsupported by any evidence. It’s also arrogant. You will probably say that Christians are arrogant, but since for the most part that is not true it doesn’t work.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:08 am
Wait, I wasn’t suppose to refer to myself as an Athiest in my comment… Old habits die hard… I did make my choice MetalCore… I chose Apatheism… As in, I don’t care whether there’s a god or not and am capable of living my life without caring… I tried to change my username from something other than “OddAtheist” but the site would put all my comments under moderation with a different username so I just kept it the same…
As for your “wrong choice” comment… There is no wrong choice for religious beliefs… Someone must believe (or disbelieve) in a path that they feel is right for them… For you to assume that Chrisitianity is the right path for everyone… Well, let’s just say that’s some stubborn thought process you have…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:55 pm
I guess Hitler’s path was right for him…You see that thoery doesn’t work…I guess the path of the 9/11 terrorists was right for them…You get the point…There is no such thing as personal truth. Ther is such a thing as absolute truth. Apathism. So you just don’t care?…Okay…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:32 pm
“So, I don’t look at the Bible the way sane people do. Sane? What is YOUR defin tion of sane?
The dictionary defintion of sane is:
1.The ability to think and behave in a normal and rational manner; sound mental health.
2.Reasonable and rational behavior
That’s the average Christian alright…And the average athiest, too.”
No, a sane Christian realizes that not all faiths are the same and wouldn’t force their beliefs onto others, regardless of what they believe to be true. You, on the other hand, have shown the opposite.
“BTW, saying that all athiests have an improved awareness of the world is not a proper generalization and is completely unsupported by any evidence. It’s also arrogant.”
I’m saying that it’s standard, you’re the one saying it’s ‘improved’.
“You will probably say that Christians are arrogant, but since for the most part that is not true it doesn’t work.”
Which is highly arrogant of you to say so.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:00 pm
You would like to force your beleifs on to me through law, I have that right, too. I just realized how much I don’t care about your opinions though, so, never mind. I respect it, But, I don’t really care for it. It’s just mildly irritating.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:31 pm
“I guess Hitler’s path was right for him…You see that thoery doesn’t work…I guess the path of the 9/11 terrorists was right for them…You get the point…There is no such thing as personal truth. Ther is such a thing as absolute truth. Apathism. So you just don’t care?…Okay…”
Except Hitler was fueled by a religious desire to create an Aryan world or nation or whatever, and to get back at the Jewish people that he scapegoated and blamed for his problems, and the 9/11 terrorists were also fueled by their religion. Here’s the fun part though, both Hitler and the terrorists? Worship the same God you do. Hell, Hitler was a part of a branch of Christianity so what was your point about personal truths again? As far as absolute truth goes, what is the absolute truth? You believe it to be Christianity, I say bulls.hit. You can’t back up why Christianity is all true and I have proof that it doesn’t (namely the history of the world if the bible is to be believed). Instead of being content with your views(AGAIN, the entire point of why you’re an ass), you feel as if EVERYONE should follow them and you’ll berate anyone who dares to argue against you, especially when they show proof that you’re wrong or when they call your nonsense out as to why you should have an impact on the personal lives of people all over.
“You would like to force your beleifs on to me through law, I have that right, too. I just realized how much I don’t care about your opinions though, so, never mind. I respect it, But, I don’t really care for it. It’s just mildly irritating.”
Here’s the big difference, you’re wanting to affect the rights of others, rights that have absolutely no effect on you. Two gay men are getting married or having sex as we speak and how is that impacting you? A woman is having an abortion because she was raped or because she can’t afford the cost of raising a child, how does that impact you? You think you have this ‘moral obligation’ to ‘correct others’ because a book that has no proof that it’s right told you so.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:47 pm
Hitler infused his nazi doctrine into Christianity. In other words, he de Christianized it. It really wasn’t Christianity anymore after HE changed it. Many Christians were killed because they refused to conform to his new agenda for Christianity. A simple fact of history.
You just want to pick fights. I can tell because you get indignant whenever I state my veiws. You have no respect for anyone who isn’t liberal. You act like people who oppose gay marriage a evil or something. It’s not racism or anything like THAT! The gay lifestyle is a very unhealthy one.
I’m not hating, I’m just pointing out that science has proven that on average a gay person lives 20 years less that the average straight guy. Sorta like smoking. It has a major health impact.
Here is my argument:
These days everyone has a strong opinion about marriage, but no one seems to be sure what it is, exactly. Is it a sacramental union? Is it a public recognition of a committed love relationship? Is it a state scheme for distributing health insurance and tax breaks? Or given what two eminent anthropologists writing recently in support of gay marriage in the Washington Post describe as a “startling diversity of socially approved forms of marriage,” is the institution too varied to fit into a single, dictionary-neat meaning?
The anthropologists are right about one thing: human beings have come up with almost as many ways of getting hitched as they have languages to tell mother-in-law jokes. Some cultures allow only monogamous marriage; some accept polygamy. In many cultures, the wife moves into her husband’s family’s home; in others, the husband moves into the wife’s; in still others, they get a mortgage and move into their own two-bedroom ranch in Levittown. Though most cultures give husbands the primary responsibility for providing for the children, some make the wife’s brother—the baby’s uncle—responsible for providing the food and the bow-and-arrow lessons. Some cultures don’t allow divorce; some allow divorce but not remarriage; some allow divorce if husbands fork over most of their life savings to the likes of Raoul Felder; and others let a guy say “I divorce you” three times before booting his wife out the door.
This protean diversity is central to today’s marriage debate. If marriage is, as these examples suggest, an eminently malleable social construct, why shouldn’t society shape it any way it likes, especially by letting gays marry each other?
But beneath all the diversity, marriage has always had a fundamental, universal core that makes gay marriage a non sequitur: it has always governed property and inheritance rights; it has always been the means of establishing paternity, legitimacy, and the rights and responsibilities of parenthood; and because these goals involve bearing and raising children, it has always involved (at least one) man and woman. What’s more, among the “startling diversity” of variations that different cultures have elaborated on this fundamental core, our own culture has produced a specifically American ideal of marriage that is inseparable from our vision of free citizenship and is deeply embedded in our history, politics, economics, and culture. Advocates for gay marriage cite the historical evolution of that ideal—which we might call republican marriage—to bolster their case, arguing that gay unions are a natural extension of America’s dedication to civil rights and to individual freedom. But a look at that history is enough to cast serious doubt on the advocates’ case.
Strange as it seems, America’s founding thinkers were as interested in the subject of marriage as any of Fox TV’s bachelorettes. Given the political experiment that they were designing, they had good reason, for they understood the basic sociological truth that familial relations both echo and shape the political order. “To the institution of marriage the true origin of society must be traced,” James Wilson, a member of the Continental Congress and later a Supreme Court justice, wrote in 1790. Before the Revolutionary War, legal philosophers and statesmen like Wilson filled magazines and speeches with discussions of what kind of marriage would best live up to the principles of the new country. It’s not surprising that they zeroed in on one quality in particular: self-government.
The Founders did not sketch their ideas about marriage on a blank slate, of course. They brought to their task a set of traditional Western assumptions about the institution, and these assumptions remained implicit in their new ideal and still resurface in our current discussions. Given that marriage was originally a religious sacrament, the Founders understood that the institution retained, even in their secular republic, an element of spirituality, an assertion that man is something higher than the beasts and more than a merely material being. The ceremony confers a special, human dignity upon our relations. In addition, they understood that marriage is a contract, regulated by the laws and ultimately enforceable by the state, that spells out property relations between the spouses, as well as their inheritance rights and those of their children. Therefore, marriage is intrinsically a government concern.
In addition to these time-honored beliefs, the Founders brought a more modern idea to the matrimonial drafting table. Like many of their educated contemporaries in Western Europe, they had come to think of marriage in a way congruent with emerging ideals of individual liberty and democratic equality. In the old world, marriage was originally a matter of caste, class, or clan. Courtship was closer in spirit to bartering than romance; young people were to be traded off by elders intent on solidifying family ties and merging family fortunes and acres.
By the late eighteenth century, however, Western Europeans were increasingly emphasizing marriage as a love-match between two self-determining individuals. Young people were free to choose for themselves with whom to spend their lives, and love could transcend class barriers to recognize the intrinsic personal worth of the beloved. This is the lesson of the profoundly democratic novels of Samuel Richardson and Charlotte Brontë, in which the drama concerns a rich, well-born master coming to realize that he loves his servant, that she is a character of sterling worth, and that he should marry rather than merely seduce her. In the same vein, the novels of Jane Austen dramatize what she understood was turning into one of life’s most momentous, morally fraught decisions. For if the young could freely choose their own spouses, they needed to do so wisely, transcending mere sexual attraction and judging their suitors’ worth in the moral rather than economic sense. Even so, at the time of the Founding, these modern ideas were still more theory than practice in Europe, where arranged marriages remained the norm.
The Founders wanted to clear away many of the traditions that had kept these democratic notions from taking firm hold in old Europe. American marriage would reflect American principles of liberty and self-government. Unlike the hordes of serfs, servants, and subjects in other parts of the world, American citizens were going to shape their own lives and determine their country’s destiny. Just as citizens would be self-governing in the political realm, they would also choose their spouses freely. According to Nancy F. Cott’s Public Vows: A History of Marriage and the Nation, the source for much of the history of marriage in America that follows, since the struggle against domination and coercion was the essence of the American nation, the young needed to be free from arranged marriages and the authoritarian fathers who contracted them. As historian Jay Fliegelman has observed, the American Revolution and the new Western seriousness about romantic love, which developed at the same time, both sprang from a heightened valuation of the ideal of self-determination.
Essential as it was, the loving, self-chosen vow was only one ingredient in the recipe for self-government. Self-government also meant citizenly self-reliance. The Founders believed that American citizens should not only be allowed to run their own lives but should be capable of doing so and responsible for doing so. In order to be free from “authority in all its guises,” as Jefferson put it, citizens had to be competent, industrious, self-sufficient, and virtuous. All these qualities were to be learned in the republican home: “The foundations of national morality must be laid in private families,” John Adams wrote in his diary in 1778.
Here Adams was voicing an up-to-the-minute theory of the republican family. Political thinkers imagined the American family as a factory specifically designed to turn out self-governing citizens—something quite different from what other kinds of families did. They believed that the affectionate ties between spouses led to civic responsibility: marriage based on individual choice would promote trust and equality that could then be projected into public life. “In detaching us from self, [love] accustoms us to attach ourselves the more to others. . . . [T]he lover becomes a husband, a parent, a citizen,” a 1791 essay in New-York Magazine put it. In addition, the Founders recognized, the colonists’ pioneer past had already made the American family an unusually and dependably self-reliant and industrious unit, just as later, when the nation expanded westward, the frontier family became a byword for rugged and indomitable self-sufficiency.
Most important, republican marriage provided the edifice in which couples would care for and socialize their children to meet the demands of the new political order. If republican marriage celebrated self-government, it also had to pass down its principles to the young; it was supposed to perpetuate as well as to embody the habits of freedom. So whereas in all Western societies, the state concerns itself with fostering the institution of the family because it is the mechanism by which the society reproduces itself, in America that state concern takes on a special urgency, because of child rearing’s unique momentousness to the national project.
The small size of American families helped here. As any soccer mom or dad knows, parents with two or three children can invest far more attention in each individual child than those with eight or ten. By the Jacksonian period, the size of American families began to shrink. According to Janet Brodie’s Contraception and Abortion in Nineteenth-Century America, the number of children born to white native-born women decreased 49 percent in the nineteenth century, from an average of seven children in 1800 to 3.6 by 1900.
Demographers usually explain the decline in fertility as the result of improvements in infant mortality rates and a shift away from a strictly agrarian economy, in which large families were an advantage, but it’s also likely that republican parents were discovering that preparing children for self-government was a mammoth undertaking, more demanding than socializing children to thrive in more communal societies.
Early republican child-rearing experts emphasized to American parents that they were responsible for creating independent, industrious, and resourceful future citizens. American children should be brought up to be active, observant thinkers. “All the faculties of a child’s mind should be cultivated,” wrote Lydia Child in Mother’s Book; kids should develop “habits of attention and activity of mind.”
American theorists also encouraged parents to abandon the demand for absolute, fearful obedience that was a relic of the old world. Children preparing for life in the new country could not remain mere passive subjects within an old-world patriarchal family. Whippings and beatings, commonplace throughout much of the world, were to be used only as a last resort; punishment “should be threatened as seldom as possible, and next as seldom executed as possible,” clergyman and child expert Horace Bushnell wrote in 1849. This kinder, gentler discipline was designed to get children to behave virtuously because they had internalized national values, not because they feared either external authority or the shame they would bring on their families.
To hear foreign travelers of the early nineteenth century tell it, the republican couple maintaining the homestead or going to church with its republican offspring was noticeably different—though admittedly, there was a downside. British naval officer and author Captain Frederick Marryat wrote of a scene that he witnessed during a visit to the United States in 1839. He watched a three-year-old named Johnny, whose mother had called him to come in out of the cold. “I won’t!” the boy answered. “Come, my sweet, I’ve something for you,” his mother implored. “I won’t,” Johnny pouted. His father took the more patriarchal approach and ordered his son inside. “I won’t,” the child insisted yet again. “A sturdy republican!” the father exclaimed, smiling, to the captain, who, being from the old world, was standing aghast.
The Founders probably didn’t foresee republican children quite like Johnny, but such “sturdiness” may have been inevitable in families in which the young had some freedom to question authority. Marryat may have been disdainful, but other European observers of the new world, including Alexis de Tocqueville, were impressed by the egalitarian, youthful spirit of the American family, which they contrasted with their own stuffy, patriarchal households. Unlike “the respectful and frigid observances of aristocratic families,” Tocqueville observed, democratic families enjoy a “familiar intimacy, which renders authority less absolute. . . . [A] species of equality prevails around the domestic hearth.” The new political order was placing unprecedented emphasis on individual rights, personal choice, and equality; the new domestic order appeared to be doing the same.
You won’t hear much about this historical background in the current debate over gay marriage, but advocates certainly invoke fragments of the American past in their argument. They frequently compare the current predicament of gays with that of other minorities, particularly African Americans, in the days before they had full rights to marriage. History, they argue, shows us that marriage is a civil right that has expanded over time to include previously marginalized groups; gays now deserve those rights as well. “Throughout the history of Massachusetts, marriage has been in a state of change,” a group of historians of marriage, family, and the law asserted in an amicus brief in the case that legalized gay marriage in the state. Gay marriage “represents the logical next step in this court’s long tradition of reforming marriage to fit the evolving nature of committed intimate relationships and the rights of the individuals in those relationships.” But detaching the “tradition of reforming marriage” from the multifaceted tradition of republican marriage not only starts history around 1968, but it also presents a seriously distorted picture of why the American government is in the marriage business at all.
While gays often invoke the black/homosexual analogy to assert in a general way that anti-homosexual sentiments are as vicious and irrational as racism, gay-marriage advocates use the comparison much more specifically. Their most commonly repeated argument goes like this: denying homosexuals the right to marry whom they wish is little different from denying blacks the right to marry whites, an injustice written into many state law books well into the twentieth century. It was not until 1967 that the Supreme Court, in Loving v. Virginia, finally ruled that state bans on such intermarriage were a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal-protection clause. “Marriage is one of the basic civil rights of man,” Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote in his decision, in words that have become a familiar refrain in the current debate. The court rested its decision on one important pillar in the sophisticated architecture of republican marriage: that marriage is a civil contract. If the Fourteenth Amendment protects the right of black citizens to enter into a mortgage agreement or take out a car loan, it certainly protects their right to marry whomever they choose. It is logically inescapable, gay-marriage advocates conclude, that the same goes for homosexuals.
And it would be logical—if a pillar were the same thing as the whole building. That the state has an interest in upholding the civil rights of individuals who want to marry doesn’t mean that that’s the only interest it has in the institution. The state also has a strong—even a life-and-death—interest in marriage as the environment in which the next generation of its citizens is raised.
An earlier chapter in the history of African-American marriage illustrates this point. After the Civil War, anti-slavery Republicans were alarmed by the promiscuity and rampant fatherlessness among ex-slaves, disastrous consequences of the institution’s prohibition against slaves entering into marriage contracts. These abolitionists created the Freedmen’s Bureau, in part as a federal marriage initiative: they wanted to encourage ex-slaves to marry and create stable families. Their aim wasn’t primarily to ensure the civil right of blacks to enter into contracts of all sorts, including marriage; they believed, above all, that American-style marriage would help ex-slaves become responsible, self-reliant citizens who would rear responsible, self-reliant children. In light of this dual state concern—the rights of the couple and the promotion of self-governing families that would mirror and sustain the republic—the historical analogy between black marriage and gay marriage that the advocates posit makes no sense.
In fact, gay-marriage proponents generally treat children as a distraction from the state’s interest in marriage rather than crucial to it. They impatiently insist that history has settled the matter: it has definitively separated child rearing and marriage, demonstrating conclusively that marriage is a changing and elastic institution that can easily accommodate homosexuals. “When a third of children are born out of wedlock, when contraception and abortion are available on demand, when you have single-parent adoption legal in every state,” Jonathan Rauch, the author of the recent Gay Marriage, has opined, “the debate is over about detaching marriage from parenthood—indeed was over years ago.” Andrew Sullivan, along with Rauch one of the most thoughtful and eloquent advocates writing today, agrees: the argument that marriage has anything to do with children, he says, “fails socially and culturally because in our culture at this time, procreation is not understood to be an essential part of what it is to be married.”
But it’s worth considering just how recently—and how haphazardly—Americans closed “the debate . . . about detaching marriage from parenthood.” For most of American history, republican marriage remained the reigning paradigm: a self-reliant and child-centered couple, who had freely chosen each other in a spirit of equality and mutual affection and who would pass on to their young not just property but also the qualities needed to live in freedom. That reign only came to an end in the late 1960s as divorce laws loosened and Americans began pulling off their wedding rings at record rates.
Divorce is such a conundrum for the nation because it follows directly from American principles even while threatening to subvert them. During the Revolutionary era, marriage theorists understood that a nation that loves liberty had to tolerate some divorce; if it was a matter of principle that you chose to enter into wedlock, it was also a matter of principle that you had to have some way of choosing to get out, at least under some circumstances. A number of early writers—including Thomas Paine, whose problems with Mrs. Paine gave him a personal stake in the issue—urged Americans to take a tolerant approach toward the practice. Still, even though divorce was more accepted in this country than in many parts of the world, it remained rare, a last resort and one that worried people deeply. That was no longer the case by the late 1960s, when squeamishness on the subject evaporated, the marital exit door flew open, and not only the battered and the miserable but also the merely unfulfilled came pouring out.
This shift was a threat to republican marriage for reasons that went beyond a mushrooming population of newly single mothers scraping together funds to pay their rent or their babysitters, while their children trekked across the country to visit Dad every school vacation. The soaring rates of divorce signaled a fundamental transformation in the American idea of marriage. As Americans crowded into the divorce courts, they were casting aside the complex—and demanding—vision of the Founders. Marriage was becoming a minimalist institution; people now thought of it as an intimate relationship between two adults, having little to do with children and nothing to do with propagating the political and moral culture.
This demand for a fuller recognition of the individual rights of spouses who sought divorce, along with the loosening relationship between child rearing and marriage—both necessary precursors for gay marriage—led inexorably to a further development. If marriage was simply a personal relationship between adults and had little to do with child rearing, Americans wondered, then what was the problem with a woman’s having a baby if she wasn’t wearing a ring? The answer could only be that there was none.
What did the law have to say about this cultural revolution, given the state’s interest in protecting marriage as the institution in which children are raised? The courts, in all their wisdom, decided that safeguarding marriage wasn’t their job any more. In case after case, judges decreed that marriage was an ordinary civil contract and that marriage and child rearing were legally unconnected. Never mind that American law and policy had always accepted the traditional assumption that marriage laws centered largely on the relationship between generations. That was history. In the 1972 Stanley v. Illinois case, to cite just one of many examples, the Supreme Court decided that custody laws distinguishing wed and unwed fathers were “constitutionally repugnant.” Fathers who had never married their child’s mother should have the same rights as those who had. More recently, the prestigious American Law Institute recommended that state family law be updated to treat cohabiting parents as virtually identical to married parents in the event of a breakup. Sometimes parents marry; sometimes they don’t. Why should the state care?
Many have interpreted these legal innovations as part of the “long tradition of reforming marriage” in America that includes giving wives more rights over their own property as well as the repeal of miscegenation laws. They were no such thing. Unlike the changes in the treatment of blacks and women, which more fully expressed the Founders’ ideals, the divorce revolution and the consequent change in thinking about marriage and child rearing represented a hard turn away from the original republican model.
Widespread divorce and illegitimacy fracture into pieces the Founders’ ideals of the self-governing family. Republican marriage had been a great experiment to harness a universal family bond into the service of a particular view of human freedom. Every society has some kind of marriage to tie parents and their offspring together, but only the American form of marriage strove to allow individuals the greatest amount of freedom within that tie. Little did the Founders expect that their most treasured ideal, freedom, would eventually be turned against the institution that they most prized for promoting that liberty by nurturing free citizens.
No one knows the personal destruction wrought during this history better than the children who were its victims. For the generation now in its twenties and thirties, the sundering of child rearing and marriage was not part of the musty past; it was a bitter and lived reality. The world they grew up in was a scary, unpredictable place of self-absorbed adults who had a habit of disappearing, only to pop up from time to time with a stranger introduced as a new member of the family.
That’s not the world they want for their own children. Few of them are familiar with founding thinkers like James Wilson or John Adams, but they know enough to see that the family life the Founders had in mind was better than the one they endured. Yankelovich Partners found in one poll that almost three-quarters of Gen Xers—that is, adults in their late twenties and thirties—said they’d favor a return to more traditional standards in family life, though only a little over a half of their boomer parents agree. Knowing firsthand what it feels like when your father sits you down at the kitchen table and, unable to look you in the eye, says, “Your mother and I don’t love each other any more”—and knowing from personal experience that their own capacity for stable relationships is shaky as a result—this generation questions a regime of drive-through divorces. A 1994 study by the National Opinion Research Center found that Gen Xers were the age group least likely to say that divorce is the best option for troubled couples. Young parents in their twenties and thirties are “nostalgic for the childhood that boomers supposedly had,” as American Demographics has put it. “It’s informed their model of the perfect, traditional marriage.”
So what are we to make of the fact that these mom-and-apple-pie young people tend to be more in favor of gay marriage than their parents and grandparents are? The great irony is that their traditionalism enlarges their sympathy for gays’ hunger for ’til-death-do-us-part commitment; after all, that’s what’s they want, too. Odd as it sounds, gays and the children who grew up in single-parent homes share the experience of standing outside and looking longingly through the window at the peaceful, Norman Rockwell family reading or playing Scrabble in front of the fireplace. Rauch and Sullivan, in particular, have written touchingly of marriage as a solemn, even spiritual, union, a momentous public vow to another person that comes with profound responsibilities and aspires to transcendence. If you add together young people’s earnest devotion to marriage and their interest in the civil rights movement (insofar as they have studied any American history at all, it’s likely to begin with Rosa Parks and end with Martin Luther King), you have a generation for which gay marriage seems merely commonsensical.
But what the young neo-traditionalists have trouble understanding is that their embrace of the next civil rights revolution, as many of them are inclined to see the fight for gay marriage, is actually at war with their longing for a more stable domestic life. Gay marriage gives an enfeebled institution another injection of the toxin that got it sick in the first place: it reinforces the definition of marriage as a loving, self-determining couple engaging in an ordinary civil contract that has nothing to do with children. That’s no way for marriage to get its gravitas back. It is marriage’s dedication to child rearing, to a future that projects far beyond the passing feelings of a couple, that has the potential to discipline adult passion. “The gravity of marriage as an institution comes from its demand that love be negotiated through these larger responsibilities [surrounding procreation],” Shelby Steele has written in response to Andrew Sullivan. Ignore those responsibilities and you get, well, you get the marital meltdown that this generation was hoping to transform.
There is another reason to be skeptical about the idea that gay marriage is another step forward in an unbroken history of social progress. In fact, the fraying of the marriage–child rearing bond over the past decades has been a step backward: it has increased poverty and inequality. Too often, single-parent families, whether divorced or never married, are poor—and very much poorer than their two-earner counterparts. Instead of being the self-reliant units the Founders envisioned, too many of them are dependent on a powerful nanny state, either for welfare payments or for determining custody and tracking down child support. And instead of being the self-governing institutions of republican theory, nurturing sturdy, self-governing citizens, too many single-parent families, as many studies have shown, bring up kids who as adults do markedly less well on average in school, career, and marriage than those who grew up in intact two-parent families. As for children of never-married mothers: many of them make up the permanent underclass, and their high rates of crime, school failure, and welfare dependency are everything that the Founders expected the republican family to prevent. That so many of these families are black would make the Reconstruction architects of the Freedmen’s Bureau weep.
Think of the past several decades of high rates of divorce and illegitimacy as a kind of natural experiment testing the truth of the Founders’ vision. The results are in: if we forget that marriage is both a voluntary union between two loving partners and an arrangement for rearing the next generation of self-reliant citizens, our capacity for self-government weakens.
Alongside the familiar anthropological truth that marriage comes in many forms is another truth you don’t hear about so much: different kinds of marriage—not to mention non-marriage—mold different kinds of individuals. The Founders envisioned a very specific sort of institution, one that would nourish a republic of equal, self-governing citizens. The evolution of marriage over the past 40 years has undermined that vision. Gay marriage threatens to sabotage it even further.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:57 pm
@oddathiest You just don’t care? Don’t you think that if there was a God (there is, but we won’t get in to that fight right now, if you don’t want to) you would want to know? Are you just tired of thinking about it at all? It’s REALLY worth a lot of time in deep thought before you just say: I DON’T GIVE A #$%@ ANYMORE!!!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:56 pm
Okay that’s alright, but if you have ANY questions, you can ask me and I will be right there to answer them for you.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:26 pm
“Hitler infused his nazi doctrine into Christianity. In other words, he de Christianized it.”
Oh, I see, if you don’t like someone else’s version of Christainity, you just disregard it.
“It really wasn’t Christianity anymore after HE changed it. Many Christians were killed because they refused to conform to his new agenda for Christianity. A simple fact of history.”
A lot of people change Christianity and a lot of Christians have killed people before, what’s your point?
“You just want to pick fights. I can tell because you get indignant whenever I state my veiws. You have no respect for anyone who isn’t liberal.”
“You have no respect for people who are different. You think they’re wrong and that’s easy.”
You can’t come up with a single reason that’s legitimate as to why you’re right and why others should be forced to follow your doctrine.
“You act like people who oppose gay marriage a evil or something. It’s not racism or anything like THAT! The gay lifestyle is a very unhealthy one.”
Go ahead, show me how it’s unhealthy. People who want to oppress someone when it comes to consenting adults will use the same
“I’m not hating, I’m just pointing out that science has proven that on average a gay person lives 20 years less that the average straight guy. Sorta like smoking. It has a major health impact.”
Says who and when. I’m willing to bet any bit of ‘science’ that came from a Christian in the 60′s to late 70′s would somehow tie AIDs or the longeivity of homosexuals to them being gay.
What’s that? A giant history report? Well, here’s somethin’ you probably didn’t realize, slick; a lot HAS changed. You’re somehow trying to argue that because they had this idea about marriage, that it should remain standing still, regardless of the fact that they had a lot of ideas about other things and they turned out pretty damn horrible. They’d be shocked to know how much religion has taken over the country to the point where many laws will be written with the expressive interest in Christianity remaining in power, as well as be shocked as to the status of black people and women. You can say ‘oh, they had more traditional views about marriage’ all you want, but what throws your history paper into doubt is the fact that, again, a lot has changed. Black people were slaves and no longer are, and slavery itself is illegal. Women were treated as property for the longest time and that’s changed greatly. You’re holding onto old ideas when those ideas are still tied to the concept of religion.
“But beneath all the diversity, marriage has always had a fundamental, universal core that makes gay marriage a non sequitur: it has always governed property and inheritance rights; it has always been the means of establishing paternity, legitimacy, and the rights and responsibilities of parenthood; and because these goals involve bearing and raising children, it has always involved (at least one) man and woman.”
Here’s something for you: Why can’t gay people raise a child? Have you never heard of adoption, or surrogate parents? There ya go, gay people can raise a child or even have one through a surrogate that’s willing to do the work. So what else is left as to why you’re now actually trying to think of non-religious reasons as to why homosexuals shouldn’t marry?
“While gays often invoke the black/homosexual analogy to assert in a general way that anti-homosexual sentiments are as vicious and irrational as racism, gay-marriage advocates use the comparison much more specifically. Their most commonly repeated argument goes like this: denying homosexuals the right to marry whom they wish is little different from denying blacks the right to marry whites, an injustice written into many state law books well into the twentieth century. It was not until 1967 that the Supreme Court, in Loving v. Virginia, finally ruled that state bans on such intermarriage were a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal-protection clause. “Marriage is one of the basic civil rights of man,” Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote in his decision, in words that have become a familiar refrain in the current debate. The court rested its decision on one important pillar in the sophisticated architecture of republican marriage: that marriage is a civil contract. If the Fourteenth Amendment protects the right of black citizens to enter into a mortgage agreement or take out a car loan, it certainly protects their right to marry whomever they choose. It is logically inescapable, gay-marriage advocates conclude, that the same goes for homosexuals
And it would be logical—if a pillar were the same thing as the whole building. That the state has an interest in upholding the civil rights of individuals who want to marry doesn’t mean that that’s the only interest it has in the institution. The state also has a strong—even a life-and-death—interest in marriage as the environment in which the next generation of its citizens is raised.”
Here’s the thing: can you point out any reason why a man should not be allowed to marry the person he loves? Can you point out any reason why a woman should not be allowed to marry the person she loves? Can you do this without referring to religion or old ideas prior to their changing? Do remember, at one point in time, black people weren’t considered HUMAN, they were considered PROPERTY. It took awhile just for people to accept the fact that they ARE human, but they still thought of them as property. It took a lot of people who thought otherwise to fight for the cause of freeing them and making slavery illegal.
“In fact, gay-marriage proponents generally treat children as a distraction from the state’s interest in marriage rather than crucial to it.”
Or rather, you’re conviently ignoring the fact that adoption and surrogate mothers/fathers are available. Opponents of gay marriage argue that because gay people can’t produce children, they shouldn’t be allowed to marry. What about infertile men and women? Should THEY be allowed to marry? Are you really, SERIOUSLY going to argue that because some people can’t produce children in an already over-populated world of SEVEN BILLION, that they shouldn’t be allowed to marry?
“But it’s worth considering just how recently—and how haphazardly—Americans closed “the debate . . . about detaching marriage from parenthood.” For most of American history, republican marriage remained the reigning paradigm: a self-reliant and child-centered couple, who had freely chosen each other in a spirit of equality and mutual affection and who would pass on to their young not just property but also the qualities needed to live in freedom. That reign only came to an end in the late 1960s as divorce laws loosened and Americans began pulling off their wedding rings at record rates.”
Again, you’re basically saying that because one idea or thought is so old and so popular, that it shouldn’t be changed to accomdate a new age.
“Marriage was becoming a minimalist institution; people now thought of it as an intimate relationship between two adults, having little to do with children and nothing to do with propagating the political and moral culture.”
Considering you don’t need to be married to have or raise children, that’s true. Infertile couples and single parents exist, single parents that came about as a result of something OTHER than divorce.
“But what the young neo-traditionalists have trouble understanding is that their embrace of the next civil rights revolution, as many of them are inclined to see the fight for gay marriage, is actually at war with their longing for a more stable domestic life. Gay marriage gives an enfeebled institution another injection of the toxin that got it sick in the first place: it reinforces the definition of marriage as a loving, self-determining couple engaging in an ordinary civil contract that has nothing to do with children. That’s no way for marriage to get its gravitas back. It is marriage’s dedication to child rearing, to a future that projects far beyond the passing feelings of a couple, that has the potential to discipline adult passion.”
AGAIN, Point how why gay people can’t raise children. If you can’t f.ucking do it, then you’ve got no platform, and you’re basically trying to bulls.hit everyone into thinking you have a legitimate reason when you’re nothing but a hateful bastard that’s a lying little scumbag.
“There is another reason to be skeptical about the idea that gay marriage is another step forward in an unbroken history of social progress. In fact, the fraying of the marriage–child rearing bond over the past decades has been a step backward: it has increased poverty and inequality. Too often, single-parent families, whether divorced or never married, are poor—and very much poorer than their two-earner counterparts. Instead of being the self-reliant units the Founders envisioned, too many of them are dependent on a powerful nanny state, either for welfare payments or for determining custody and tracking down child support.”
So because a bunch of idiots that got married too soon and had kids, that’s your reason as to why gay people can’t get married?
“And instead of being the self-governing institutions of republican theory, nurturing sturdy, self-governing citizens, too many single-parent families, as many studies have shown, bring up kids who as adults do markedly less well on average in school, career, and marriage than those who grew up in intact two-parent families. As for children of never-married mothers: many of them make up the permanent underclass, and their high rates of crime, school failure, and welfare dependency are everything that the Founders expected the republican family to prevent. That so many of these families are black would make the Reconstruction architects of the Freedmen’s Bureau weep.”
Republican, Republican, Republican! That’s all you’ve been f.ucking saying! That because “Republicans said this so many years ago, it MUST be true!” like they had the answers to EVERYTHING. Has it ever occured to you that they might have been WRONG? Do remember, people say a lot of things, and just because they’re apart of a political platform or religion, doesn’t mean they’re right automatically nor is their platform or religion.
“Think of the past several decades of high rates of divorce and illegitimacy as a kind of natural experiment testing the truth of the Founders’ vision. The results are in: if we forget that marriage is both a voluntary union between two loving partners and an arrangement for rearing the next generation of self-reliant citizens, our capacity for self-government weakens.”
Of course, it could be the results of stupid people and the number of people that are alive, it could be any number of other factors. You’re simply taking numbers and saying ‘this is why gay people can’t get married’ instead of analyzing just WHY those numbers are so high. You’re all for preventing gay people from being married, and you’re using the same logic that racists used as to why black people and white people shouldn’t be allowed to marry, because ‘it threatens the stability of traditional marriage’. Traditions change, apparently you haven’t.
“Alongside the familiar anthropological truth that marriage comes in many forms is another truth you don’t hear about so much: different kinds of marriage—not to mention non-marriage—mold different kinds of individuals. The Founders envisioned a very specific sort of institution, one that would nourish a republic of equal, self-governing citizens. The evolution of marriage over the past 40 years has undermined that vision. Gay marriage threatens to sabotage it even further.”
Back then you bought your wife with a giant pig and $50 bucks. Oh yeah, we’ve certainly ‘ruined’ the system of marriage they had in place during those times!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:56 pm
I bet you didn’t see that article coming did you? Your opinion doesn’t make my views any less viable anyway. You think that you can go through and dissect my post and then say that it is unrue. That’s not how life works. Suck on that and don’t bother me with your silly opinions until you find a more worthwhile subject to arue about…Say, gun control.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:26 pm
“I bet you didn’t see that article coming did you?”
Your giant wall of text that you had to have gotten from someone else? Makes sense that you got it from an article that a person with a similar lack-of-mind as you.
“Your opinion doesn’t make my views any less viable anyway.”
No, but facts do, which is exactly what I’ve been saying the whole time.
“You think that you can go through and dissect my post and then say that it is unrue. That’s not how life works.”
So you’re basically saying that because I have sensible ideas and proved how your logic is insane and outdated, that somehow I’m the one in the wrong, or that you’re just going to disregard all of that and call yourself right.
“Suck on that and don’t bother me with your silly opinions until you find a more worthwhile subject to arue about…Say, gun control.”
Let’s just say you admit to being a coward and a liar and leave it at that.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:05 pm
I am good at that. It’s not like it was stupid, I was saying that is wahit it is like. I’m not wrong. Not sure whether you meant to be mean or just pointing out that it was funny.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:28 pm
your redundant description of redundancy was redundant
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:38 pm
You just want to say something bad about me. Bad attitude, nothin’ I can do about it.
Now for a joke.
Guess what a thirsty alien says?
Take me to your two-liters.
It’s funny when you say it out loud.
Sometimes.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:43 pm
I-I don’t even…
are you brain damaged?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:04 pm
No, I’m just having a good time. I haven’t said anything retarded anyway, so, why did you ask that?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:57 pm
for whatever reason, I can’t post hyperlinks. so I’m just going to end this right here.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:43 pm
What did you think of the joke, though? was it funny?…Or not?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:17 am
please learn to read implications. I can’t be the only person that can analyze a few words and come to an educated conclusion.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:30 pm
I guess it had a fair effect. Apricot asked if I was brain-damaged. That is funny in itself. I get the point.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:12 am
let me help you add it all up… You say a joke, Apricot asks if you are brain damaged after said joke… Therefore… Actually, I’m going to see if you can get it now… With it laid out…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:04 pm
I got him/her to ask if I was brian damaged though…MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!!
4 the lulz…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:05 pm
BRIAN DAMAGED!?….#*@%
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:41 am
he took my clever bit of wit, completely missed the point of it and took it as an insult.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:19 pm
Oh, don’t worry I get the point. No big deal. No insult. The funny part was when I spelled brain damaged as brian damaged.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
6:47 am
Where you been at figgy? Smoking some green you forget to post story’s?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:53 pm
Let’s try to be Christlike…Hopefully we can respect each other’s beleifs and get along like real adults.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:26 pm
That would be nice for once…I doubt anyone would cooperate, though.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:31 am
Welcome to Christwire
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:42 pm
I figured that out…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:17 am
These Canadians are terrible people. Neil Young, Justin Beiber, Alex Trebek. All Canadian, all evil.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
3:30 am
You must not like Erich then seeing how he’s a Canadian that or he just drove up there every week to play in his Canadian band back in the 80s
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
12:50 pm
Erich is a brother in the faith and is helping Canada be more American and correct. He is also White.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
1:41 pm
Oh, come on! We are all equals. Being white isn’t anything special. He isn’t better off then blacks by just being white. That’s what the Bible says.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
9:33 pm
Wow are you ignorant? White people are way better. It’s science.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
1
7:27 pm
You are officially wrong. You are harboring an evil view. You are flat out incorrect. I just don’t know what to say…Wicked man…No, thing…Monster.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
4:35 pm
Racist.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:46 pm
I’m white too, and I’m a terrible example of humanity.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
8:07 pm
Thanks for admitting that. In one way, we all are. We all have sinned and fallen short of God.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:09 pm
The question is: Are we ready to accept the fact that we can never be good by ourselve? We we’re not born this way. We need God. We need to change.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:06 pm
No I am I’m gay and white so under gods ideas I’m a worse then you
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:00 pm
that’s a pathetic way to go about life Metalcore. you want to know why I resent humanity? it’s ways of thinking aligned with such beliefs. evil is our burden to bear, and our crime to repent. God will not help us unless we help ourselves.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
7:40 pm
You have a somewhat warped worldview, apricot. We can do nothing with out God. We are saved because of God’s grace. Plain and simple. We can’t fight evil by ourselves. That is obvious. God works through us to fight evil. We are either on God’s side of against him. There is no middle ground.
Submitting to evil and not resisting it…Now THAT is pathetic.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:20 am
Anyone can believe. that doesn’t change their morality
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:00 am
“We all have sinned and fallen short of God.”
But didn’t Jesus die to wipe the slate clean? What the hell was the point of all of that if it ultimately was for nothing?
“We can do nothing with out God.”
So everything before Christianity didn’t matter? You mean all of the things that were lost to time because Christians decided to burn and eliminate anything useful because ‘it was heresy’ to let it exist that we slowly started to adopt back into society? The peaceful societies that existed long before Christianity was adopted didn’t accomplish anything except exactly what you would have wanted to happen, sans the worshiping of Christ?
“God works through us to fight evil.”
Evil that he created, mind you. So, really, it’s like you’re saying that God is telling us to clean up his mess. Are you being serious right now, because you’re basically calling God a shi.tty parent.
“We are either on God’s side of against him. There is no middle ground.”
Only the Sith deal in absolutes.
I have a test for you, by the way. You’re stuck in a room, and it’s been about, say, several hours since you and the person closest to you (as in, say a lover) have pray and since then you’ve sinned. Any amount you want to say is fine as long as it puts you in Hell, and you both figure you’ll pray because why not.. You both are about to pray at the same time in the same room when God comes down and tells you to stop. He then instructs you to kill this person. If you do it, you go to Heaven, you live, and all is well, but you have to do it RIGHT then and there. The other person will go to Hell but you get a ticket that guarantees a spot in Heaven for you. If you don’t go through with the murder, you will die right there and go to Hell yourself.
Now, you’re probably going “How do I know if it’s truly God, what if it’s Satan?” and let’s say God proves it. The guy in front of you in whatever image you think God is in is the real deal. He made a puppy out of thin air and gave it wings and then made it walk upside down in mid air without using it’s wings, whatever would convince you that the being before you is indeed the Almighty. With you being convinced now, what do you do? Do you kill the person that means the most to you and have them go to Hell while you go to Heaven (and they stay in Hell, if you think that they’ll go to Heaven by-proxy, then God tells you no, you will witness them burn in Hell any time you look down), or do you have yourself die instead and go to Hell (again, no going to Heaven just because the other person wanted it to happen, you will be stuck down there, forever to be tortured because you failed to kill the person that means the most to you)?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:39 pm
Here is some clarity on the subject of salvation.
God’s Simple Plan of Salvation
My Friend: I am asking you the most important question of life. Your joy or your sorrow for all eternity depends upon your answer. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good you are, nor if you are a church member, but are you saved? Are you sure you will go to Heaven when you die?
God says in order to go to Heaven, you must be born again. In John 3:7, Jesus said to Nicodemus, “Ye must be born again.”
In the Bible God gives us the plan of how to be born again which means to be saved. His plan is simple! You can be saved today. How?
First, my friend, you must realize you are a sinner. “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).
Because you are a sinner, you are condemned to death. “For the wages [payment] of sin is death” (Romans 6:23). This includes eternal separation from God in Hell.
“ . . . it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment” (Hebrews 9:27).
But God loved you so much He gave His only begotten Son, Jesus, to bear your sin and die in your place. “ . . . He hath made Him [Jesus, Who knew no sin] to be sin for us . . . that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21).
Jesus had to shed His blood and die. “For the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Lev. 17:11). “ . . . without shedding of blood is no remission [pardon]” (Hebrews 9:22).
“ . . . God commendeth His love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8).
Although we cannot understand how, God said my sins and your sins were laid upon Jesus and He died in our place. He became our substitute. It is true. God cannot lie.
My friend, “God . . . commandeth all men everywhere to repent” (Acts 17:30). This repentance is a change of mind that agrees with God that one is a sinner, and also agrees with what Jesus did for us on the Cross.
In Acts 16:30-31, the Philippian jailer asked Paul and Silas: “ . . . ‘Sirs, what must I do to be saved?’ And they said, ‘Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved . . . .’ ”
Simply believe on Him as the one who bore your sin, died in your place, was buried, and whom God resurrected. His resurrection powerfully assures that the believer can claim everlasting life when Jesus is received as Savior.
“But as many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on His name” (John 1:12).
“For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” (Romans 10:13).
Whosoever includes you. Shall be saved means not maybe, nor can, but shall be saved.
Surely, you realize you are a sinner. Right now, wherever you are, repenting, lift your heart to God in prayer.
In Luke 18:13, the sinner prayed: “God be merciful to me a sinner.” Just pray: “Oh God, I know I am a sinner. I believe Jesus was my substitute when He died on the Cross. I believe His shed blood, death, burial, and resurrection were for me. I now receive Him as my Savior. I thank You for the forgiveness of my sins, the gift of salvation and everlasting life, because of Your merciful grace. Amen.”
Just take God at His word and claim His salvation by faith. Believe, and you will be saved. No church, no lodge, no good works can save you. Remember, God does the saving. All of it!
God’s simple plan of salvation is: You are a sinner. Therefore, unless you believe on Jesus Who died in your place, you will spend eternity in Hell. If you believe on Him as your crucified, buried, and risen Savior, you receive forgiveness for all of your sins and His gift of eternal salvation by faith.
You say, “Surely, it cannot be that simple.” Yes, that simple! It is scriptural. It is God’s plan. My friend, believe on Jesus and receive Him as Savior today.
If His plan is not perfectly clear, read this tract over and over, without laying it down, until you understand it. Your soul is worth more than all the world.
“For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul?” (Mark 8:36).
Be sure you are saved. If you lose your soul, you miss Heaven and lose all. Please! Let God save you this very moment.
God’s power will save you, keep you saved, and enable you to live a victorious Christian life. “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, Who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it” (1 Corinthians 10:13).
Do not trust your feelings. They change. Stand on God’s promises. They never change. After you are saved, there are three things to practice daily for spiritual growth:
Pray — you talk to God.
Read your Bible — God talks to you.
Witness — you talk for God.
You should be baptized in obedience to the Lord Jesus Christ as a public testimony of your salvation, and then unite with a Bible-believing church without delay. “Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord . . . .” (2 Timothy 1:8)
“Whosoever therefore shall confess [testify of] Me before men, him will I confess also before My Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 10:32).
Copyright: Robert Ford Porter, 1991
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:17 am
I apoligize for intruding on your question to MetalCore… But I just gotta say that this:
“He made a puppy out of thin air and gave it wings and then made it walk upside down in mid air without using it’s wings, whatever would convince you that the being before you is indeed the Almighty.”
Is perhaps one of the best hypotheticals I’ve heard in awhile
10/10
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
2:55 pm
Aside from MetalCore chickening out and being a coward, there’s still no proof that Christianity is the one true religion. Why didn’t God do something sooner about all of the other religions that came before even Judaism? Why didn’t the natives of North and South America and Africa as well as Asia know about this God? You’re telling me that ever since the creation of man, in your opinion, God has let countless souls go to Hell just because he was too much of a prick to let them know he existed until some white folks came over and shot them.
You feel the need to make other people worship Jesus, and you’ll insult them if they don’t. After all, who are YOU to tell who’s going to Hell? Are YOU God? What if God has something in store for them? You’ll talk about how no one knows what God wants, and then act as if you do. Even better, you fail to realize this and instead of shutting up and be happy with your religion and focus on how you can be a better person, you’ll still argue and rant and rave about how others are wrong because you have a bible that tells you it’s right. With the logic that Christians like you have, I could pick up a comic book and say that Superman is real because the comic says so and details his adventures and life.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
3:26 pm
Calm down a bit. Why are you acting so provoked?
I am not God and I have no idea who is going to heaven and who is goin to hell. We are just given a set of things not to do while in our relationship with Christ.
After the scattering at the tower of Babel God made many different languages. Christianity was lost in some tribes and groups of people as they roamed the globe. A good example of why it is a good idea to make sure your children know the truth so that it will not weaken or die out over the generations. Since when was I chickening out?
A musical interlude.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:28 pm
@oddathiest. What the…I don’t even get the point of that statement. Besides, you don’t care remember? If you are taking the time to state your complaint about Christianity, the, you do care, to some degree.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:54 pm
@MetalCore
I think you’re confused about Apatheism… I don’t care in regards to what I believe in… Personally, I don’t care if there is any higher power and I can live my life perfectly fine without ever knowing a higher power…
I do care, however, if someone is trying to push their beliefs unto others… Such as you claiming that Christianity is the only right choice and that you’re screwed without the christian God… That I do care about…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:05 pm
Hey look, it is impossible to not be forcing some sort of beleif onto some one in America’s law. what will it be? Athiestic laws of Christiuan laws. You can’t just say that Christians force their veiws on to people when athiests do it all the time, too. Obamacare forces Christian buisness owners to pay for insurace that covers abortion. That is forcing them to violate their conscience.
BTW, you can live just fine if there is a higher power without paying regard to it. It’s after that I was worried about… Just read it. It is worth evry moment of your time. It is really the most improtant decision you will ever make in your life. Chose well.
God’s Simple Plan of Salvation
My Friend: I am asking you the most important question of life. Your joy or your sorrow for all eternity depends upon your answer. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good you are, nor if you are a church member, but are you saved? Are you sure you will go to Heaven when you die?
God says in order to go to Heaven, you must be born again. In John 3:7, Jesus said to Nicodemus, “Ye must be born again.”
In the Bible God gives us the plan of how to be born again which means to be saved. His plan is simple! You can be saved today. How?
First, my friend, you must realize you are a sinner. “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).
Because you are a sinner, you are condemned to death. “For the wages [payment] of sin is death” (Romans 6:23). This includes eternal separation from God in Hell.
“ . . . it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment” (Hebrews 9:27).
But God loved you so much He gave His only begotten Son, Jesus, to bear your sin and die in your place. “ . . . He hath made Him [Jesus, Who knew no sin] to be sin for us . . . that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21).
Jesus had to shed His blood and die. “For the life of the flesh is in the blood” (Lev. 17:11). “ . . . without shedding of blood is no remission [pardon]” (Hebrews 9:22).
“ . . . God commendeth His love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8).
Although we cannot understand how, God said my sins and your sins were laid upon Jesus and He died in our place. He became our substitute. It is true. God cannot lie.
My friend, “God . . . commandeth all men everywhere to repent” (Acts 17:30). This repentance is a change of mind that agrees with God that one is a sinner, and also agrees with what Jesus did for us on the Cross.
In Acts 16:30-31, the Philippian jailer asked Paul and Silas: “ . . . ‘Sirs, what must I do to be saved?’ And they said, ‘Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved . . . .’ ”
Simply believe on Him as the one who bore your sin, died in your place, was buried, and whom God resurrected. His resurrection powerfully assures that the believer can claim everlasting life when Jesus is received as Savior.
“But as many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on His name” (John 1:12).
“For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” (Romans 10:13).
Whosoever includes you. Shall be saved means not maybe, nor can, but shall be saved.
Surely, you realize you are a sinner. Right now, wherever you are, repenting, lift your heart to God in prayer.
In Luke 18:13, the sinner prayed: “God be merciful to me a sinner.” Just pray: “Oh God, I know I am a sinner. I believe Jesus was my substitute when He died on the Cross. I believe His shed blood, death, burial, and resurrection were for me. I now receive Him as my Savior. I thank You for the forgiveness of my sins, the gift of salvation and everlasting life, because of Your merciful grace. Amen.”
Just take God at His word and claim His salvation by faith. Believe, and you will be saved. No church, no lodge, no good works can save you. Remember, God does the saving. All of it!
God’s simple plan of salvation is: You are a sinner. Therefore, unless you believe on Jesus Who died in your place, you will spend eternity in Hell. If you believe on Him as your crucified, buried, and risen Savior, you receive forgiveness for all of your sins and His gift of eternal salvation by faith.
You say, “Surely, it cannot be that simple.” Yes, that simple! It is scriptural. It is God’s plan. My friend, believe on Jesus and receive Him as Savior today.
If His plan is not perfectly clear, read this tract over and over, without laying it down, until you understand it. Your soul is worth more than all the world.
“For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul?” (Mark 8:36).
Be sure you are saved. If you lose your soul, you miss Heaven and lose all. Please! Let God save you this very moment.
God’s power will save you, keep you saved, and enable you to live a victorious Christian life. “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, Who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it” (1 Corinthians 10:13).
Do not trust your feelings. They change. Stand on God’s promises. They never change. After you are saved, there are three things to practice daily for spiritual growth:
Pray — you talk to God.
Read your Bible — God talks to you.
Witness — you talk for God.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:07 pm
It really is critical. Like the post says. Don’t trust your feelings, they change. Everyone’s greatest enemy is their very own self.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:25 pm
@MetalCore
Perhaps it is impossible… But as an individual, you can take steps to avoid pushing (or at least come off as looking like you’re pushing) your religion….
Also, while I’m not trying to be rude, that rather lengthy comment… Is stuff I’ve already heard a hundred times over… Once again, not tying to be rude… I can see your urge to help… I really do… But it’s nothing I haven’t already heard (Ugh, I was kind of redundant there)
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:47 pm
“Hey look, it is impossible to not be forcing some sort of beleif onto some one in America’s law. what will it be?”
Let me ask you something: when are you going to answer just how gay marriage or abortion or any other law you disagree with is going to affect YOU? You say you love your gay relative, but apparently not enough for him to be considered an equal in the eyes of society. Apparently that’s just too much for you!
“Athiestic laws of Christiuan laws. You can’t just say that Christians force their veiws on to people when athiests do it all the time, too. Obamacare forces Christian buisness owners to pay for insurace that covers abortion. That is forcing them to violate their conscience.”
Because religion should not have any impact on the way a business is run or how the government works. They can disagree with abortion or birth control all they want, but if the law says that they have to provide coverage for that, then they’re low on choices and none are beneficial for them. People like you complained when black people or women were considered equals as far as the law was concerned and you had to actively make sure that women and black people were employed instead of hiring just white men.
“BTW, you can live just fine if there is a higher power without paying regard to it. It’s after that I was worried about… Just read it. It is worth evry moment of your time. It is really the most improtant decision you will ever make in your life. Chose well.”
You still have no proof that such a thing will happen. You CAN’T prove that such a thing will happen. There are countless numbers of religions that have their own idea of what happens after we die, what makes you so sure you’re right? Even better, even with the whole ‘heaven/hell’ thing, those religions have different ideas of what you should do to get there, what about conflicting actions? What if action A gets you to heaven in religion B but sends you to hell in religion C?
“In Luke 18:13, the sinner prayed: “God be merciful to me a sinner.” Just pray: “Oh God, I know I am a sinner. I believe Jesus was my substitute when He died on the Cross. I believe His shed blood, death, burial, and resurrection were for me. I now receive Him as my Savior. I thank You for the forgiveness of my sins, the gift of salvation and everlasting life, because of Your merciful grace. Amen.”
So then why is it we’re still going to Hell if Jesus died instead? Did he die in vain? What, was God going to nuke the world if he didn’t have himself be killed? You can say ‘mysterious works’ all you want, eventually you’re just lying to yourself.
“Just take God at His word and claim His salvation by faith. Believe, and you will be saved. No church, no lodge, no good works can save you. Remember, God does the saving. All of it!”
Why can’t I believe in Odin? Or Zeus? Oh, because they aren’t real? Well what makes God so different then?
“God’s simple plan of salvation is: You are a sinner. Therefore, unless you believe on Jesus Who died in your place, you will spend eternity in Hell. If you believe on Him as your crucified, buried, and risen Savior, you receive forgiveness for all of your sins and His gift of eternal salvation by faith.”
Which means you just said that Jesus died in vain considering the slate was no longer wiped clean. What, does it only take believing in Jesus to go to heaven? Is that it? You can murder children and burn old people for kicks but as long as you believe Jesus died for you, you go to Heaven?
“You say, “Surely, it cannot be that simple.” Yes, that simple! It is scriptural.”
So is every other religion.
“It is God’s plan. My friend, believe on Jesus and receive Him as Savior today.”
Your advertising needs work, I’ve heard better commercials on my tv.
“If His plan is not perfectly clear, read this tract over and over, without laying it down, until you understand it. Your soul is worth more than all the world.”
So then why did he let every single native of the Americas, Asia, and Africa go to Hell then? Some plan, have some random 15 year old girl in the Middle East give birth to himself and hope her husband doesn’t kill her for having an affair and then kill the child, then sacrifice himself to himself just to save the world from himself, and the entire time knows that it’ll be futile since people are still going to be full of sin.
“Be sure you are saved. If you lose your soul, you miss Heaven and lose all. Please! Let God save you this very moment.”
What if we go to Valhalla, or what if we all go straight to see Hades?
“Pray — you talk to God.
Read your Bible — God talks to you.
Witness — you talk for God.’
More like:
Pray – make a wish on a shooting star, then say ‘god works in mysterious ways’ when it doesn’t happen.
Read the bible – see a bunch of old and dead people talk about things like they know exactly what God wants.
Witness – Say things you want to happen and then say that it’s what God wants, then when you’re confronted with your own logic of ‘no one knows what god wants’, be a coward and switch the subject.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
5:09 pm
From me to L.N.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:11 pm
Power Trip
Face to face
No time to waste
This is the time for revenge
Your claim to fame
Of crushing dreams
Your control has no hold on me
I hate the way
You have no shame
You act like nothing’s happened
It’s time to rise
The final fight
This is the last time
I will not fail again
I will not let you win
Fu.ck your power trip
I’ll throw away
The wasted days
The chance for revenge
My claim for fame
Ended in vain
This was the last time
You are the one who’s forsaken us all
Nothing has changed so together
We fall
I am the one who’s led us to believe
You can’t change me
You in a nutshell. My opinion of you as well.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:13 pm
I listened to that song and I immediately knew what I would post the next day. It’s so true.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:22 pm
L.N. When you went through and dissected that article on salvation, you really pissed me off. I know that making me angry was objective, but still, it just proves that you just don’t get it. You just want to look smarter than somebody else. Did you think it was smart to dissect that article on salvation? The way you took it apart proved that you only have a sunday school knowledge of the gospel. You just proved me just how little you know…Fail…On your part at least.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:02 pm
“L.N. When you went through and dissected that article on salvation, you really pissed me off.”
So you consider oppression to be salvation?
“I know that making me angry was objective, but still, it just proves that you just don’t get it.”
Oh I get it alright, you’re looking for any excuse as to why your thoughts and views should be the law and when you start pulling out things that the founding fathers said, you’re VERY careful as to what in particular you want them to say. F.uck the idea that religion and law should never mix, right?
“You just want to look smarter than somebody else. Did you think it was smart to dissect that article on salvation?”
Considering you’ve completely lost it at this point, I’d say it’s a fact that I’m a hell of a lot smarter than you, especially since you’ve basically lived under a rock your whole life and your balls still haven’t dropped all the way.
“The way you took it apart proved that you only have a sunday school knowledge of the gospel.”
You deny a lot of the gospel and pull out whatever is convenient for you, you don’t want to admit that God made evil even when it’s in the book. You have to rely on faith to prove religion right when there’s so much evidence that contradicts and proves it wrong. How is the Earth supposed to be 10,000 years old if we have rocks that are millions of years and they’re some of the youngest we’ve found? How could the world have a population of 7 BILLION if there’s been so much destruction reigned by God? You fail to answer the idea of what happened to the souls of those who have never heard of God that lived in places outside Europe or the Middle East, you failed to answer between God and yourself (would you kill the person that means the most to you if God commanded it), and you’ve failed to show an ounce of sanity. Just what makes YOUR brand of Christianity the RIGHT one? You think homosexuals are sinful, what about Christians that don’t? Are they wrong? Well, SOMEONE has to be if your religion is so damn strict that it only allows ONE faith to be the right one, so who is it?
“You just proved me just how little you know…Fail…On your part at least.”
Considering you can’t answer questions properly and how little you’ve shown to know about your own religion, it’s hilarious to see those words come from you.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:13 pm
Law and religion don’t mix…Athiesm is a religion genius.
Christianity is more of a relationship that a religion…Salvation is freedom from sin, not oppression. That’s your opinion, though. That’s you in a nutshell. If someone is in your way, (and they would be very right to be doing so!) well they can just go f#$% themselves. A real hard nutshell, too.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:58 pm
“Law and religion don’t mix…”
They shouldn’t, but whoever wants to make it happen will occasionally find a way.
“Athiesm is a religion genius.”
Please do tell me what the holy book for atheists is and what days do atheists congregate and worship the non-existent gods and goddesses? I must’ve missed the memo somewhere.
“Christianity is more of a relationship that a religion…Salvation is freedom from sin, not oppression.”
You forcing your ideas onto someone and having a direct impact on their lives IS oppression, you f.ucking idiot. Did your mother not teach you that?
“That’s your opinion, though. That’s you in a nutshell. If someone is in your way, (and they would be very right to be doing so!) well they can just go f#$% themselves. A real hard nutshell, too.”
Considering my way is off the beaten path and you have to actively TRY to get in my way, you might be on to something.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:43 pm
They aren’t evil. I know some great Christians from
Canada. Justin Bieber says that he’s a Christian, too.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
4:25 pm
Like Maple Syrup, Canada’s Evil Oozes Over The United States.
Get with the times.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
1
4:34 pm
So your waxing poetic now? America make Maple Syrup, too. Do you deny the fact that many Canadians are good Christians? There are many nice secular Canadians too, I’m sure.
You just have this fantasy that America is the most perfect nation ever and every other country is just evil. That is dumb.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:36 pm
Think of your children pledging allegiance to the maple leaf. Mayonnaise on everything. Winter 11 months of the year. Anne Murray – all day, every day.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
1
7:37 pm
It’s no big deal. I wouldn’t care about that at all. I’d be just fine with that.
BTW, you are racist.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
4:35 pm
Why are you hatin’ on the Canadians, man?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:36 pm
Canadians are always dreaming up a lotta ways to ruin our lives. The metric system, for the love of God! Celsius! Neil Young!
Praise or Condemn:
1 
1
7:36 pm
I am american and I like the metric sytem…It’s so much easier to work with…Canada’s much better from the measurments perspective.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:51 pm
how many grams is in a football field? You don’t know because the metric system is only for measuring illegal drugs.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
2
1:24 pm
Are you an idiot?! A gram is a unit of weight, not an area. Grams are useful for other things than illegal drugs. A paperclips wieghs about a Gram.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
10:46 pm
August, the metric system makes much more sense. 100 centimeters in a meter, 1000 milligrams in a gram, etc. The standard system is not nearly as simple- 12 inches in a foot, 5280 feet in a mile, 16 ounces in a pound, and so on. The U.S is one of the only countries that still uses the standard system. And Celsius makes a lot more sense, too. 0 degrees is the freezing temperature for water, and the boiling temperature is 100 degrees. With Fahrenheit, it’s 32 degrees and 212 degrees.
Praise or Condemn:
2 
0
5:15 pm
When I was doing early measurements, I loved metric. It makes so much more sense. I’m doing geometry now, so, metric and me might meet again.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:45 am
American football is in yards. None of this communist stuff.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:27 pm
I think you mean your cult religion oozes over us but like your friends in scientology we are all finding out just how fake you are.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
8:10 pm
Those are fightin’ words, buddy.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:27 am
nope. because Andrea Libman is from Canada
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:50 pm
who?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:22 pm
I dunno.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:25 am
one of the greatest voice actors ever.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:28 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Irqx6bDZ9sQ let me make that a LITTLE easier to follow
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:32 pm
Whoever made this site needs to correct that auto-embed issue. Either they need to have work so that it shrinks the video to fit, or so that it only posts as a link. I think it only happend when you write text above the link but I may be wrong.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:05 pm
WHY WHYNWHY ARE YOU STILL ALIVE
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:41 pm
Alex trebek is sort of a cool guy…I don’t know that much about him though and wouldn’t beleive a word you would tell me about him.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:07 pm
Sorr you’ll not resist
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gvb3PqVDkX0
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:12 pm
what is m.youtube? Masturbation videos? No thanks!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:33 am
I’m on my I pad m means mobile
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:19 pm
Don’t be dumb, August.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:49 pm
Masturbation is dumb!
Praise or Condemn:
2 
0
1:22 pm
Yeah, whatever, but you get the point. The M stands for mobile in the link.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:08 pm
We can’t take that chance. I refuse it.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:17 pm
I will click the link for you, okay? I will then tell you what lies on the other side. I am no liar.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:19 pm
It links to a list of random songs. No p*rnos. Nothing particularly interesting, but still, you can click it.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:22 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=KV1UKiVSvzQ
To you, August, A great song for your listening pleasure. A guy called average user posted it, and I liked it, so, here you go.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:27 pm
How do pronounce you last name? Your little bio says that you are 48 and RETIRED?! That is WAY to early to retire if you’re asking me.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:44 am
Same as Rachel Weisz.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
12:53 pm
why would anyone want to retire?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:26 pm
My Dad is well into his 60′s and he’s still working…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:37 am
http://youtube.com/watch?v=GuX-pXXzz-E
WANT HIM DEAD HERE THEN WATCH THIS
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:50 am
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/media/screenshots/transmog/bloodelves?keywords=&view#/blood-elf-male011
I win
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:21 am
that is quite possibly the most Flamboyant Blood elf I have ever seen XD
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:52 am
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/media/screenshots/transmog/draenei?keywords=&view#/draenei-female002
*drools* so much Russian
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:54 am
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/media/artwork/trading-card-game/series5?keywords=&view#/tcg-series5-074
Figgy someone accdeintly painted you
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:56 am
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/media/artwork/trading-card-game/series5?keywords=&view#/tcg-series5-063
Christwire right here
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:00 am
See this site is died another week and no new post.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:22 pm
They have’nt posted anything funny or good…I’M BORED!!!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:22 pm
I put the apostrophe in the wrong place.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:04 am
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/media/fanart/?keywords=&view#/fanart-1295
BOW BEFORE YOUR GOD
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:31 am
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbxpth2I2x1r8x1eqo2_1280.png
There is only one I serve.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:55 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=DgTZAYgHuGg
Just wanted to share…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:01 pm
Are you a Christian? Just curious…Nothing to do with the image, though.
WHY?! WHO MAKES THOSE HORRORS?! WHO GETS THOSE IDEAS IN HIS/HER (God forbid) MIND?! WHAT SORT OF HEAD INJURY…?!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:05 pm
its world of warcraft thats a destruction warlock using cataclysm with a dreadlock set and a dread stead and a human warlock the staff is a staff of reaping i know so much about it because i play the game and because fi you play the game its not hard to see what this is
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:31 am
I played EQII. so I was a WoW rival
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:26 pm
its world of warcraft thats a destruction warlock using cataclysm with a dreadlock set and a dread stead and a human warlock the staff is a staff of reaping i know so much about it because i play the game and because fi you play the game its not hard to see what this is..Wow.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:30 am
it is called Grimdark.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:22 am
Ah, the beauty that is Grimdark… Question, who’s the artist behind that particular pic you posted?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:32 am
http://misspinkamena.tumblr.com/
if it will let me post the link
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:32 am
I have a Christian base to my beliefs
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:06 pm
What does that end up looking like?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:34 am
like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=571ysyDrLSs&feature=player_detailpage#t=7s
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:25 pm
I thought it wasn’t gonna be pretty…I was right.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:08 pm
I really should say that, because I am one of those people who gets those thoughts…You know all the bloody fanfiction pics…I think they’re great…Not sure if that is a good fascination, though…I listen to metal, so maybe that feeds my interest in all that wierd/gory/shocking/offensive stuff.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:12 pm
I think that it come from listening to stuff like this…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=jn8u8wPNOWk
I LOVE THE SCREAM IN THE INTRO!!!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:39 am
I don’t like gore though, I just really love psychosis.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:28 pm
I like violence…When they make the blood the right color. In saw 3D they made the blood pink…That was terrible…I hate that move with a passion…It ruined the series. Kevin Gruetert wanted to direct Paranormal Activity 2…They didn’t let him do that and assigned him to saw 3D…Poor guy, no wonder he messed it up.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:29 pm
Psychosis? What sort of pshychosis? I’ve gotta think twice before I spell that one.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:51 pm
That image reminded me of this amazing song. It comes off of one of my favorite albums of 2012, other than “Awakened” by As I Lay Dying.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:53 pm
It has a pretty graphic album cover, though. Not for the faint of heart. Definetly not.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:53 pm
That is pretty disturbing.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:59 pm
I feel like taking a break from being at odds with you… And ask a personal question…
Why do you like metal music? I’m just asking because I, personally, can’t stand to listen to it for more than a few minutes…
Btw, I’m not putting down metal… I will never put down any type of music… I’m just genuinely curious about why people like certain things… Figured this would be a nice break from religious talk….
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:54 pm
Thank you so much for saying that you were tired of being at odds. I am too. That made my day.
I really came to like it slowly. I liked rock at first but it evolved into an enjoyment of metal. I really like clean vocals, (non-screaming, it has nothing to do with cursing) but some singers (if you can call them that, I understand your view very well, after all it is an aquired taste) have figured out how to scream and keep most of their actual voice in it (which makes them able to sort of sing a tune while screaming). I like it because, well, I just find it moving. I like the tune in the background of the chorus in the song above very much. I also think that is make the message of some songs more powerful. I just love the guitar. (I tend to like songs with a strong lead guitarI really like songs like as I Lay dying’s Defender, Resilience and A Greater Foundation. I would have really hard time choosing a favorite artist. (All That Remains, As I lay Dying, Caliban)
It really started when I used to listen to my local rock sation. They would Play some songs by Five Finger Death Punch that I really like. They went off air about 1 or 2 years ago, so I looked up 5fdp (Five Finger Death Punch, popular abbreviation) and I found out that they most sang songs with screaming. That was the start. 5fdp was my favorite artist of all time until I heard their song “Salvation” (I Am SO sorry, my Christianity plays a huge part in this story, too) and I figured out, they were a conservative group but were anti-Christian. In the list of similar artists, there was a group entitled: All That Remains (Their is a Christwire article about them!!! It’s wrong, I’ll also note. They say that Phil Labonte [the singer] is a Christian, he is most certainly NOT!!!). I had heard one of their singles on the radio, so I looked them up. I loved their music. They have TWO great lead guitarists and a great singer. Then I heard their song: Beleive In Nothing. They were no longer my favorite artist. I still listen to their music (& 5FDP) but, I was looking for an artist who’s worldview I could relate to. Then I found As I Lay Dying. I used to hate their 1st single “94 hours” because it was all screaming. No I listen to it almost daily. At this point I had gotten over my dislike of screaming. I had really liked KoRn previously and jus about maybe a month ago I looked them up. The didn’t really do “Metal”, but I really like some of their songs. I especially love their new album “The Path Of Totality”. That album was basically dubstep, no screaming, just uncensored cursing. (Which I find frustrating, but never mind) Their song entitled “Way Too Far” really stood out to me. It has an amazing lyric. You should look that one up (hey, It ain’t metal!). I also found an artist that used more standard pop lyrics (love songs, breakup songs) and just put it to metal music (they have some electronic influence in their music, too).
One day I started getting lyric ideas of my own. KoRn inspired me to start writing my own songs. I really like writing them, you can just put all of your emotion onto a peice of paper. I really liked the songs that really had emotion and meaning to them, so that is what I strive to write (not just anger,hate and death. I really like a song with deep meaning, not just a song you can just listen to in the background, the kind of lyric that makes you think, that’s what I’m talking about). I had been trying to learn guitar for a while, but I decide that that was not for me. I tried piano and that came much more easily. When I can play well, I might revisit guitar and try to figure it out but for now, that’s fine. Hopefully one day, I will be able to my own music. I’m not sure which I would do. I really like pure metal with a bass, lead and chord guitars, but I also like metal witha strong dubstep or electronica (There is an artist called “The Browning, that I discovered that uses a heavy electronic influence to make them different them other artists) influence.
BTW, Metal is not my only genre I like. I could probably find something I like out of every genre (I listen to Justin Bieber, beleive it or not!). I really enjoy David Guetta and Sia’s Titanium.
I could go on forever about my musical taste, but I think that this post should serve it’s intendede purpose quite well.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:04 pm
That story basically amounts to your whole life. Right? I know you, but not that much.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:06 pm
I am like the only metal guy in all of my family, so this is a very familiar subject.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:08 pm
@Abrahmsq, it doesn’t amount to my whole life. Just the last 3 to 4 years or so.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:09 pm
I have the worst spelling and grammar in that post.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:10 pm
I could post my favorite lyrics if any of you wanted me to. Just in lyric form, so that you could understand what was being said. It’s kinda hard to tell with the screaming and all that.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:12 pm
Sure, post them, I’m curious.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:15 pm
“Way Too Far”, by KoRn.
Here it comes
Once again
‘Irrational’
I give in
Paranoia
Expands within
Little voices start to begin:
Everyone’s out to take your joy away
Constantly scheming to keep us at bay
Everyone’s plotting and they are just taking
You must make it stop
Make them pay
Sometimes I just take things
Way Too Far
Irrational feeling
I just try too hard ’cause
What goes up, must come down
The problem is I have no bounds ’cause
Sometimes I just take things Way Too Far
Reality is surreal
Wretchedness is all I feel
Now its really just a way
God, I hear the voices say:
Everyone’s out to take your joy away
Constantly scheming to keep us at bay
Everyone’s plotting and they are just taking
You must make it stop
Make them pay
Sometimes I just take things
Way Too Far
Irrational feeling
I just try too hard ’cause
What goes up, must come down
The problem is I have no bounds ’cause
Sometimes I just take things Way Too Far
Wooohoooo! Wooooohooooo! Wooohoooo! Wooooohooooo!
Sometimes I just take things
Way Too Far
Irrational feeling
I just try too hard ’cause
What goes up, must come down
The problem is I have no bounds ’cause
Sometimes I just take things Way Too Far
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:16 pm
I literally survived on that song.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:21 pm
“Perfect Life”, by RED
You pretend what you say you feel
You pretend that you’re something special
All the lies that you hide behind
I see right through you, see right through you
Paint it on, cover every inch
Any flaw will expose your weakness
I’m immune to your fantasy
I won’t become you, won’t become you..
You want a perfect, PERFECT LIFE
Nothing wrong, nothing real inside
All I see is a perfect lie.
I don’t want your perfect life [x2]
So, keep your dream with no consequence
You’d damage me just to feed your senses
All you fake for reality
I see right through you, see right through you
Take your pride, take your vanity
Can’t you see that your ego’s empty?
I will turn, I will walk away
I won’t become you, won’t become you..
You want a perfect, PERFECT LIFE
Nothing wrong, nothing real inside
All I see is a perfect lie
I don’t want your perfect life [x3]
My eyes are wide open..
I see the enemy, the hypocrisy
Your cover is fading
Secrets pouring out, castles falling down
There’s nothing to hide behind
I know who I am inside
I’m perfectly broken..
You want a perfect, PERFECT LIFE
Nothing wrong, nothing real inside
All I see is an empty lie
I don’t want your PERFECT LIFE [x4]
The perfect life!
This is a fairly new favorite, (the album that it’s from, “Release The Panic”, hasn’t even been released yet, pun intended) I started liking it after all of those fights I’ve had on Christwire. I found it to be saying just what I was thinking. I love this song.
There’s no screaming in it either, so you can look it up without having your face melted off.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:35 pm
Huh, it’s pretty interesting that your music and beliefs intertwine like that… Pretty cool actually
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:51 pm
So what sort of music do you like?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:58 pm
Yeah, you know, I decided, If I’m gonna be a Christian, then I’m either gonna be all in or it’s pointless. It’s dumb to beleive in a religion, but only practice half of it, because you don’t like the rest.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
6:10 pm
Mostly electronic… Techno, Dubstep, House… also some punk rock, Rise Against, Flogging Molly… Stuff like that… Been getting into chiptune lately…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
6:13 pm
Oh yea, and Nerdcore… Forgot about that genre…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:18 pm
oh, I know Rise Against. I can never understand their sond “Savior” though. I had to look up what the music video meant…And then I was like, really?
BTW, Here is my favourtie electronic (That isn’t weird.).
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:20 pm
I have the worlds worst spelling on the internet.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:25 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=TCAF9wpGFis
I love this, too. This song is really special to me. It was the first screamo song I liked…The lyric is amazing, even though it is not the most weel written…
things we cannot quite concieve,powers of geography. Darkness so blinding, haunting manipulating. Assorted delights will abound, in a land from sound. Authorities that’s temporary, princes of hell in their playgrounds.
Killers, you are killers. Killers you are killers. killers…
Madmen who hold us hostage, nightmares are manifesting bondage.
Taunting me, harassing, ripping through.
the separation of whats true, lie in waiting, overtake.
All is forsaken, there is another way.
Killers, you are killers. Killers, you are killers. Steal, kill, destroy.
KIllers, you are killers. Killers, you are killers. Steal, kill, destroy.
I thought that this was a very perceptive song. It’s totally brutal, though, so watch out. I love the intro on this one, too.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:27 pm
Nerdcore? Whazzat?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:31 pm
Oh yeah, just to add I’m starting to try to learn screenwriting along with songwriting…I can’t wait until I’ve learned to write music…That’ll be fun.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:35 pm
2013 is going to be an amazing year for me in music…So many great albums are going to come out (RED, KoRn, Trivium, Killswitch Engage, Love & Deaths 1st album, Metallica…I’m sure I’m forgetting something important, but it’ll have to wait)…What are you looking forward to in music this year?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:36 pm
Now that I think about it…2012 was a pretty good year, too. I like to look back over the year and decide what I thought were the best albums, singles, Etc.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:38 pm
Apple or Windows?
Me: Windows 7.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:40 pm
Apple or Windows?
Me: DOS
No, just kidding. Windows 7
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:08 pm
What about movies? Any faves?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:25 pm
Here @oddathiest. I found this amazing dubstep song. Do you like it? Just wanted to share.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:06 pm
Nerdcore is a combination of Rock and classic gaming music… Mostly from the 8-bit and 16-bit era…
For a good example, look up ‘Save World Get Girl’ by ‘I Fight Dragons’
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:20 pm
I’d prefer Windows… But I’m stuck with only an iPhone… So Apple…
As for fave movie, Ghostbusters… Hands down my all time favorite
What’s the name of that Dubstep song MetalCore… My phone won’t open the video
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:33 pm
A thing called love-Culture code remix. That is the dubstep song.
Favorte movie[s] (it would probably be creepy if I said the saw franchse [saw II in particular] so, I won’t) I actually never saw those all the way through. That was probably just my sick fascination with horror movies kicking in…Suprise?
Lord of the rings: the return of the king?…Yeah, I’ll call that #1. The Legend Of The Gaurdians: The Owls Of Ga’Hoole was good though…Them I read the books and found out that they were better. (For the most par that is.) (I read them while listening to hardcore metal and dubstep though, so my perception may have been twisted.)
BTW, I looked up the nerdcore song and I decided that nerdcore was an appropriate name for the genre…Lulz.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:58 pm
What make my liking of saw creepy is the fact that I am only 15.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:08 pm
That is flat disturbing.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:48 pm
That is a pretty damn good song… Might have to add that to my playlist…
A cool thing about I Fight Dragons is that they actually use old Nintendo systems (NES, SNES, Gameboy) in their music… As a gamer, I love it…
I wouldn’t worry about thinking you’re disturbing for liking Saw at age 15… I liked far, far worse when I was your age…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:41 am
wow OddAtheist, did you just list my absolute favorite genres?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:22 pm
Saw was just so iconic…I never really liked the classics…Friday the 13th, Nightmare on elm st…I liked Saw, though. It’s weird because I was like 4 or 3 when the first one came out, so I knew nothing about it until about a year or 2 ago.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:14 pm
Hey, guess how I found that dubstep song?
Through Christwire, beleive it or not. Someone posted a link to a website called http://www.morethanskrillex.com/ on one of the articles on skrillex, and that song was like on the very fist page or something like that.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:32 pm
I used some chiptune loops in some of my music projets a while ago…But I’m a was still a metal guy, so that never got far.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:05 pm
To be honest… The Saw movies are tame to me… I find them a little bit dull…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:46 pm
Yeah, watched it for the violent parts…I pretty much skipped the rest…It’s weird though…I know about everything about the movies…I really liked how it was edited, too…I would like study editing one day.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:50 pm
I liked the 2003 edition of Bleak House…A Charles Dickens series…Not the 1980′s edition…That one was horrible…I’ve been watching a lot of Dickens, and that one really stood out to me.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:21 pm
Saw is a cheap scare. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdfsHc1w_94
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:15 pm
If we wan’t to talk about game based horror movies then, what about Resident Evil? that is a good series. The latest installment was good.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:32 pm
I liked Resident Evil because they used the Killswitch Engage song “The End Of Hertache in the credits of one of the movies. I really like KsE, so that made me like Resident Evil. I liked KsE even more when I found out that their current lead singer, Jesse leach, is a devout Christian. (Jesse left the band in 2002 to be replaced by Howard Jones. Howard left the band in early 2012 to be replaced by Jesse Leach.) Yay!!!
BTW, I liked Howard a lot, though. I’ll probably miss his vocals on their upcoming album.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:23 pm
He sure ain’t my God. Or the one true God.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:06 am
I imagine myself looking like this
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/media/fanart/?keywords=&view#/fanart-1279
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:21 pm
You must have very low self-esteem…Lulz.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:05 pm
Then again, It couldn’t be that bad…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:33 pm
Message to christwire from Canada
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YWF9gYI_mhU
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:58 pm
I’ve watched some of his stuff.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:57 pm
One of my favorite music videos.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=EN3T9SY_wNo
I just decided to randomly post videos…4 the lulz.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:03 pm
That’s “Way Too Far” by KoRn, if you wanted to know before clicking the link. It is a good song.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:13 pm
@Abrahmsq
I would of answered your question where you actually asked it… But I can’t find the reply button connected to that comment… So I figured it’d be easier to find down here…
It isn’t a matter of “F*ck it, I give up!”… I’ve been stuck a sort of spiritual limbo for quite sometime… And struggled finding something I truly believed in… I was raised Christian but throughout the rest of my life… I met so many different people with different beliefs… And that started me on my limbo path…
Eventually I chose Atheism… Choosing not to believe… But even that wasn’t right so I was back to being stuck… It was sometime after that I find myself apathetic out belief in general… It was actually a quote exbrony posted on here sometime ago that got me thinking… And finally Apatheism just fit me… I’m fine not having to prove my actions to a higher power in order to accomplish sonethin in an afterlife… I’m fine living in the now and feeling a pressure from a belief… After making my decision… I actually feel great… Free, if you will…
Hopefully that answered your question and possibly any future questions anyone else might have…
There you have it… A little background histoy of OddAtheist…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:01 pm
I have had maybe once (several times really, but there was one time where I almost left) seriously thought about leaving, but I really thought it was something to…I don’t know…Wrong maybe?,no not that…It was a strange feeling, and I can’t quite put a word on it…To leave behind. There’s some Abrahmsq history.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:29 pm
I hate it when I can’t find the reply button.
Since I started commenting I have accumulated over 875 e-mails in my inbox…I haven’t deleted much more than 1 of them.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:12 pm
So you don’t think that Christianity is wrong?
You didn’t leave because you thought: “oh man, Christianity is so full of problems and is just in the way of progress. I’m not beleiving in THAT any more.
It wasn’t like that?…That’s good…Not that it IS good, but you get the point.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:13 pm
I posted this comment at 5:12 PM, PST.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:13 pm
I will use this comment as a reference point to find out what time zone Christwire runs in.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:15 pm
It’s way ahead of me, evidently…Well, no, just a couple of hours. EST I would guess.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:16 pm
Just as I posted the clock changed to 5:13. Bummer.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:56 pm
@Metalcore Fan,
You wrote… “So you don’t think that Christianity is wrong?” So I ask you… Do you think Christianity is wrong? If so how is it wrong? Are you claiming Christianity is wrong and other religions are not? How did those other religions get it correct?
I ask because your comment kind of jumped out at me as I scrolled down reading comments and it made me ask myself those same questions.
Thanks, RBRS
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:07 pm
I thnk that Christianity is right. A long with Skrillex, dubstep, bronies, and metal music. You did ask a good question, though. A real first. You know, It’s really nice to put some good thought towards that every once and a while.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
10:18 pm
Indeed Metalcore! Check out my post below… I put lots of serious thought N2 tht one as well.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
10:32 pm
Metalcore, Never listened to Skrillex, Dubstep isn’t my 1st pick of genres, bronies certainly appear harmless and metal music is bangin’ tho I prefer an older metal sound.
Oh thanks for the “good thought” comment, its been many months since I last stopped in to say hello.
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
1:23 pm
Wow…I never thought that you would be like that…That’s good, though.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:26 pm
As a younger Christian, I have always head my parents talk about opposition to christianity. I always though that it would never really affect me, but now I since I joined Christwire I see that when you say what you beleive, poeple don’t like you for it. Oppostition to Christianity is very real. It was really eye-opening how many people are willing to argue abainst it for days on end…I’ts a good thing I stand firm in my beleifs.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:29 pm
Up until about 3 or so years ago, I was just “a Christian” and didn’t know too much about it. Now that I’m older and I’m forming my worldview I realize just how essential it is to have a firm grip of the gospel and general Christian apologetics. I have now idea where I would be without them, now.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:30 pm
Sorry, I’m not a world-class speller.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:34 pm
I really started monitoring the kind of music I was listening to and now I always prefer a artist wo is writing songs that are coming from a firm Biblical worldview. As I grew in the gospel I realized that I found some things more that came from a secular point of view offensive and gradually eliminated the worst of them from my life altogether. It’s definetly an ongoing prcess, but I try to do my best.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
11:43 pm
Oh, did you think I wasn’t religious because I thought it was wrong? I have nothing against Christianity… It’s just not for me… Maybe this will clear the air between us…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:25 pm
That’s nice…I just am tired of saying that I am a standard Christian and having people call you anything from and idiot to a hypocrite. They are talking to a real person with feelings for heaven’s sake…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:50 pm
Oh, I think it did clear up any problems. It is nice to have a civilised conversation with someone who desn’t think that you are 1. a liar 2. a coward 3. a hypocrite 4. dumb 5. extra-dumb because you are homeschooled.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:52 pm
You are dutch. You do not posses english grammar skills…And if you do, you don’t care to use them.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:04 am
he has better skills than most Americans.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:23 pm
O rly?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:40 pm
I replied to the wrong comment. It took me days to realize that.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:44 am
I left Christianity for two reasons
1.IM GAY I’m not believing a religion that thinks I’m going to hell
2. It was not believable to me Taoism is much more I’m actually finding more belief in satanism but right now I’m still Taoist
3. You can never find a Russian gay christian that likes a American gay Christian so each
4.http://www.screwattack.com/shows/originals/death-battle/death-battle-goku-vs-superman
5. What he has done I have a hard time of letting go of someone’s past and god just seems for to sadisticly sane which I will not believe in
6. Knowing all if I’m going to hell he created em to go to hell
7. Teachings of Taoism made me feel more like I can adapt it into my life
8. There is no god on Taoism which makes me feel less like something is always watching me
9.all seeing if he is he watches people have sex watches people masturbait and watches people kill them self
10. Taoism has a theory relitive to evolution
11. I hate the church it seems a tad jealous to have a whole day where you do nothing but worship him Taoism does not do that
12. God does not explain why bad exists yin and yang say good cannot exist without bad had says something can be all good
13. He’ll in Taoism is a more beautiful but it tortures you by seeing your past and bad things and things you regret
14. A being I guess that is mentioned does get angry and hates some of his children
15. He did not create us we arbut a accident
16. I can’t stand xian lies
17. Some Christians say they dont hate gays yet read a bible that says they should
17. Christian scientists
18 I can’t accept that if I die I will go there forever at least Taoism has reincarnation for those who go to hell
19. Lucifer kills 7 people while god kills millions
20. I call him god not anything else I feel unwillingly like im in cult for a master with no name
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:51 am
you mind telling me a little about Taoism? I’ve actually been interested in it.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
6:48 pm
Taoism has one thing go with the flow many hippies in the 70s were Taoist
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
12:59 am
makes sense. but I’m too ambitious to go with the flow and I’m always inherently against the grain.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:20 pm
AW, $#!%.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:36 pm
He has 1 good point. Do not beleive in a religion if you are purposely doing something that clearly violates it. Other than that, he’s just lost in space…Satanism isn’t satan-worship like it sounds, it’s just like the religion of me! Me! ME! Basically, you do whatever you want unrestrained. Not a good idea for anyone. It would be pretty bad if we all did that.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:03 am
Satanism has rules and customs, you know. just as any other religion. it’s not as selfish as you make it out to be, rather it is about hedonism in general.
Luciferism is what I don’t get. why worship a being that wants to see us undone?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:22 pm
Yeah, it’s just pure hedonism. Basically, all pleasure is intrinsically good. That’s hedonism.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
1:45 am
that’s great! I’m glad you’ve found a belief system that fits you.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:45 pm
Justin Bieber is also a murderer. (really?) Recently, the very presence of his automobile (the TwinkMobile)(Really?) caused a young, aspiring family man (How on earth does MARK E. FIGS of all people know THAT!?…He doesn’t.)and part-time photographer to DIE while attempting to obtain a picture of said automobile (Actually the Biebs IN the automobile, turns out he wasn’t. The photographer ran back across the road and bam! Stay classy, hit and run.). The “TwinkMobile” (Such fertile imagination) claimed another man, this time not in the homosexual way in which Bieber is accustomed. (What the serious?!?!You know)
When confronted with this tragedy, Bieber didn’t apologize, instead deflecting the blame onto the photographer, (since he had noting to do with it and it is stupid to run across a freeway, I’m totally cool with that)and then going off to smoke on some marijuana cigarettes. (lie)
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
10:15 pm
@average abuser – Quoting from brother Mark’s text is fine, but it looks like you braved the cold, and dark uncertainty of sharing one of your personal thoughts with us… let me find it again… OK, last word at the very bottom of your post is your own beliefs about brother Mark’s well written work.
You quote Mark from text about Bieber going off to smoke on some marijuana cigarettes. Now is where you share your line of thinking on this story with the world, and you made absolutely certain that everyone saw your comment by placing it inside…( ).
Excellent call, so you think the marijuana cigarette comment was Mark going too far, crossing a line perhaps into fiction or rumor. And by firmly putting your boot down on brother Mark’s neck to call him out on this alleged “(lie)” or gross uncalled for oversight I think you’ve done the right thing. I too await a reply to your inquiry.
RBRS
Praise or Condemn:
1 
0
1:49 am
On my F*CKING GOD F CK YOUR GOD F CK ANY WHO THINK YOU SMART REALLY JUSTIN BIEBER WOULD NOT DO THIS WHY BECAUSE HE WOULD GO TO JAIL OR LOOSE HIS CAR SINCE HE IS A LITTLE BRAT HE WOULD NOT DO THAT SERIOUSLY WHY OH MY GOD SERIOUSLY LET THE CHAINSAW FACTORY TEAR YOU APART AS I C M ON YOUR CORPSE AND THEN HOPE YOU DIE A FATE WIRSE THEN HE’LL THAT EVEN THE DEVIL WILL HATE AND WOULD DESPAIR OVER YOUR GOD TELL HIM TO GO F CK HIMSELF WHILE HE GETS F CKED UP THE A S BY THE DEVIL HIMSELF
Praise or Condemn:
0 
2
2:58 pm
Are you posessed? You’ve got something wrong with you…THAT is sick.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
3:01 pm
Where did you get the idea that you could say that to somebody?
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
2:28 pm
Someone has to point it out sometime and I wasn’t going to just let that pass. Thanks.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:53 pm
I’m sorry that commenters like jesse can even say thing like that about God…it’s like what I said earlier, people can be really hostile.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
6:48 pm
Maybe they’re hostile because certain people decide that they should be forced to live a life that isn’t theirs.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:32 pm
You shut up…That comment was unacceptable and if you are O.K. with that comment you have no social graces.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:14 pm
Oh, I’m sorry, you take issue with the fact that people are pissed off at you because you support laws and such that prevent them from being happy? You’re mad that someone’s calling out your bulls.hit? You think people shouldn’t be happy with their lives unless they have Jesus, and yet what’s funny is you want them to have the kind of Jesus you have, which is different than the kind of Jesus that other people have. What a f.ucking world we live in, ain’t it? And yet you think you’re some entitled little s.hit and a hero for hurting others the way you do.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:37 pm
WHY OH MY GOD SERIOUSLY LET THE CHAINSAW FACTORY TEAR YOU APART AS I C M ON YOUR CORPSE AND THEN HOPE YOU DIE A FATE WIRSE THEN HE’LL THAT EVEN THE DEVIL WILL HATE AND WOULD DESPAIR OVER YOUR GOD TELL HIM TO GO F CK HIMSELF WHILE HE GETS F CKED UP THE A S BY THE DEVIL HIMSELF…So you are A-O.K. with that? You are obscene.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:38 pm
That was just the 300th comment…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:07 pm
Rage and hate beget rage and hate, Iron Head.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:09 pm
Rage and hate beget rage and hate, Iron Head…What the…! was that? At least you capitalized Iron Head…Wait a minute, I’m not ragin’ and hatin’…You are.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:03 pm
Considering you’re commenting about someone being pissed off, and they’re pissed off because you want to directly tell them that they’re wrong for being themselves and you’re telling them that they’re going to Hell when you aren’t God and you have no idea if they actually are or not, since YOU ARE NOT GOD. You’re basically wanting to act as the voice of God, and yet you’re the one who feels the same, so obviously you’re putting your own words into what God ‘wants’.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:00 pm
I’m hostile because I am gay and he simply laughs at the death of us I can’t stand the death of a guy because it makes me think they are gay and I just imagine it that way and I just cry women I feel differently I cry when any man dies because its a weird gay thing I have and d mnit I can’t stay on topic anyways I’m Dutch and he calls us inherently evil I’m part Chinese infact my mother is Chinese and calls her a commie when there is nothing wrong with communism Russia and china just did it wrong he then goes on to insult video games my pass time and infact got me pass seeing my father killed in front of me it’s just hard to deal with it when he wants them banned and then well I’m alright with everyone having guns unlike other countries we have a lot of criminals and taking away guns is bad and the. He wants to see anyone not Christian killed and then circumcision I’m not sure on his option then I get hate for being a MRA and I want to kill myself and this really I hate so I don’t bottle it up
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
7:34 pm
Where in the Bible does it condenm the dutch and chinese? Nowhere.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
8:16 pm
You’re still riding a high horse, thinking that you’re right and everyone else is wrong, and anyone who disagrees with you, you label as something evil.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
9:38 pm
Comment didn’t post…#$%^ you Christwire…
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:33 pm
My gay cousin has better self-control than you. He knows I disagree with his lifestyle and choices and he doesn’t curse me for it. I don’t curse him for it either, we are civilised people for hevean’s sake, not like you. You shut up and leave it to those who have experience. He is a better ambassador for it then you are. The more you talk about it, the less I like it. You’re not bringing me over to your side. Stop assuming things about me.
There.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:36 pm
Christwire is a bad representation of the bible…This is the worst place to hear about it. They hate gays. I don’t. I don’t really love them either. I like my gay relative because he is one of God’s children, not because he is gay.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:15 pm
You still feel like your cousin shouldn’t be married if he wants to though, and you feel that way ultimately because of your religion You can believe whatever the hell you want and have exceptions to your rule, but when you decide that your beliefs should be EVERYONE’S, THEN we have a problem. You think gay people shouldn’t be married because the bible says so, and then when pressed for information that doesn’t come from the bible, the one time you pull out SOMETHING, all you have is just the trend of society as it progressed and you called it a bad thing.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:56 pm
Thanks for improving your language.
Your opinion:
2.Denying them is a violation of religious freedom (civil and religious marriages are two separate institutions).The main reason for denying marriage to gay couples is that all major religions consider homosexuality a sin; however, the First Amendment of the Constitution clearly states that a person’s religious views or lack thereof must be protected. Marriage by the state is a secular activity; the government cannot start making laws just because a religion says they should. What’s next, should we make taking the Lord’s name in vain a criminal activity because Christians consider it a breaking of a commandment?
3.Marriage benefits (such as joint ownership, medical decision-making capacity) should be available to all couples.Marriage is more than a legal status. It affects many things in society such as tax filing status, joint ownership of property, insurance benefits, and agency law. It affects critical medical decisions. For example, if one member of a gay couple that has been together for 20 years gets critically ill, visitation may not even be allowed since the other isn’t considered a “spouse or immediate family member”. Also, critical medical decisions must often be made when one person is incapacitated; e.g. should a certain surgery be done or not? It is completely unfair to deny these privileges to people because their relationship doesn’t fit the state’s definition of one.
4.Homosexuality is an accepted lifestyle nowadays with most evidence strongly supporting biological causation.For too long homosexuality has been considered a form of “deviant sexual behavior”. Those making these accusations should examine the history books and the psychological research. Throughout our history going all the way back to ancient Greece, homosexual relationships have existed. The term “lesbian” comes from a Greek island called “Lesbos” where many such couples lived. An overwhelming amount of research has been done showing that homosexuality has a biological causation; not a genetic one, but a biological one. The easiest way to think of it is as a hormonal switch that gets thrown one way or the other. And if you think about it, it makes logical sense. Consider many gays and lesbians you’ve seen. Not always, but most times, some secondary sexual characteristics resemble the opposite sex. In other words, homosexual males often have softer voices. Lesbians may have strong cheekbones and a more masculine body shape. It’s all affected by those hormone switches. And why would someone choose to be gay. Do people analyze the situation…”Let’s see, I can be discriminated against, ridiculed by friends and co-workers, rejected by my family, told I’m going to hell by the church, subjected to beatings by gay bashers…hmmm, sign me up!” Now, there will be odd cases where people experiment with different types of sex, but you can’t just teach people to be gay or not gay for a lifetime.
5.Denying these marriages is a form of minority discrimination.America was founded on the concept that the majority should rule, but the rights of minorities should be protected. It is the main reason we have a Bill of Rights as well as anti-slavery and equal protection amendments. Denying marriage to a homosexual couple is no different than denying marriage to Hispanic or black couples.
6.It doesn’t hurt society or anyone in particular.A marriage is a relationship between two people. How does it hurt society or people not involved in the marriage? It is a personal commitment that really is no one else’s business. Society shouldn’t be dictating what two people can or can’t do when no one else is hurt in the process. If the church or certain groups disapprove, that’s their right, but it isn’t their right to stop it.
7.The only thing that should matter in marriage is love.The number one reason that heterosexuals marry is not to establish legal status, allow joint filing of taxes, or protect each other in medical decision-making. They marry because it is the ultimate expression of a person’s love for another. Marriage is a commitment that says “I love you so much that I want to live the rest of my life with you. I want to share the ups and downs, forsake all others, and be together until death do us part.” Should it matter that the couple doesn’t fit into what society is used to? Some people talk about living wills and other legal contracts that can give homosexuals essentially the same rights as a married couple. If that is the case, why don’t all heterosexual couples use these legal maneuvers instead of marriage? Just maybe there’s something more to it.
8.The number of child adoptions should increase since gay couples cannot pro-create (although some might see an increase in gay adoptions as an argument against same-sex marriages).Like any heterosexual couple relationship, a same-sex marriage may fuel the desire for a family. Since gay couples cannot have kids naturally, this will likely increase the desire to adopt. Since there are so many kids around the country in need of adoption, this is a good thing. However, others believe a child reared in a same-sex marriage do not develop ideally. Evidence at this point is inconclusive since same-sex adoptions have yet to become widespread.
9.It encourages people to have strong family values and give up high-risk sexual lifestyles.One of the main arguments against gay marriage is that it would further erode family values; however, the opposite is true. The problems related to sexuality in our society such as STD’s stem from carefree, frivolous lifestyles; in other words, having frequent, unprotected sex with many partners. Marriage encourages people to settle down and to give up that type of lifestyle. Married people commit themselves to one partner and work to build a life together. Isn’t that the type of behavior we want to encourage?
10.The same financial benefits that apply to man-woman marriages apply to same-sex marriages.In today’s economic environment, it often takes two incomes to live. A married couple shares rent, utilities, and other bills, which are often difficult for one person to take on alone. This is especially truly if a dependent person is involved such as a child. In addition, a married couple can often financially support each other when times get tough, such as when one of the two is out of work. The other can continue to pay the bills until the unemployed person gets back on his/her feet. Owning a house is often impossible without another person to share the financial burden, and owning a home is not only part of the American dream, it promotes stability and community pride.
Mine:
2.Most religions consider homosexuality a sin.Virtually every religion in the world, including the major ones in this country, consider homosexuality unacceptable. It is offensive and a swipe to the religious freedom of the majority to have to recognize a relationship they consider sinful. The legal system in the United States evolved out of the laws contained in the Bible. We shouldn’t go even farther to tear down those laws.
3.It would weaken the definition and respect for the institution of marriage.The 50 percent divorce rate has already weakened the definition of marriage. We shouldn’t be taking further steps to define what marriage is. A law allowing gay marriage would increase the number of joke or non-serious marriages, such as a couple of friends who want to save on taxes. Marriage is the most sacred institution in this country, and every society considers it the joining of a man and a woman. It makes biological sense since only a man and woman can pro-create.
4.It would further weaken the traditional family values essential to our society.The building blocks of our society and the thing that makes it strong is the traditional family of man, woman, and children. It is what has sustained us through two world wars, terrorist attacks, a Great Depression, and numerous other challenges over the centuries. While friends & lovers come and go, your family is always there. The main reason our culture and values have started to crumble is the weakening of families. Introducing another form of “family” would only make the situation worse.
5.It could provide a slippery slope in the legality of marriage (e.g. having multiple wives or marrying an animal could be next).Gay rights activists claim that these marriages should be allowed because it doesn’t hurt anyone, but it could start a chain reaction that destroys the whole idea of marriage. If someone wants to marry his dog, why shouldn’t he be able to? What if someone wants to marry their brother or parent? What if someone wants to marry their blow-up doll or have 10 wives? Unless we develop some firm definition of what a marriage is, the options are endless. If these options sound absurd, remember that all it takes is a few activist judges to use the statute to open the door. It doesn’t matter if 95 percent of the population disagrees with the policy, one judge can interpret the case the way he or she wants and use the doctrine of stare decisis to impose a law on everyone. Do you remember how two judges in California recently declared the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional? If the decision hadn’t been overturned, it would have prevented millions of children from being able to say the pledge every morning, despite the fact that 95+ percent of Americans disagreed with the decision.
6.It confuses children about gender roles and expectations of society, and only a man & woman can pro-create.Children learn about expectations and gender roles from society. It’s difficult to teach the importance and traditions of the family when such confusion is thrust upon them. Only a man and woman can bear children, and for thousands of years, a man & woman headed household has carried generations of people through life.
7.The gay lifestyle is not something to be encouraged, as a lot of research shows it leads to a much lower life expectancy, psychological disorders, and other problems.Studies show that homosexuals, for a variety of reasons, have life expectancies of approximately
20 years less than the general population.
Just like a lifestyle of smoking, drinking, etc., unhealthy lifestyles should be discouraged.
There is the picture.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:33 pm
“2.Most religions consider homosexuality a sin.Virtually every religion in the world, including the major ones in this country, consider homosexuality unacceptable. It is offensive and a swipe to the religious freedom of the majority to have to recognize a relationship they consider sinful. The legal system in the United States evolved out of the laws contained in the Bible. We shouldn’t go even farther to tear down those laws.”
The dominant religion in the US also thought slavery was a-ok, black people weren’t human, and that women shouldn’t have the say-so in ANYTHING. Do you believe these things to be true? Your religion also happens to conflict with my ‘religion’, so consider this: Who is forcing you to marry a man? You’re wanting to spin religion with the legal system when there should be a barrier between the two. Obviously you don’t think so and you want to take a sledge hammer to it.
“3.It would weaken the definition and respect for the institution of marriage.The 50 percent divorce rate has already weakened the definition of marriage. We shouldn’t be taking further steps to define what marriage is. A law allowing gay marriage would increase the number of joke or non-serious marriages, such as a couple of friends who want to save on taxes. Marriage is the most sacred institution in this country, and every society considers it the joining of a man and a woman. It makes biological sense since only a man and woman can pro-create.”
You just admitted there you don’t want society to progress. You’re also trying to cram in some last minute ‘men and women make babies’ when there are MANY children that don’t have parents. That, and what do you say to infertile couples? Should they be allowed to marry? They can’t make children, they’ll need someone else’s assistance. And your bit about ‘friends wanting save on taxes’? Who the hell is to say that doesn’t happen already? What if a guy and a girl decide to get married to save on taxes and money and s.hit? You’re taking a very miniscule, if even existent scenario and blowing it up to insane proportions. And you DO realize that there ARE ways of finding out if someone is doing just that and arrest them, right? Of course not, you ignore the truth for your fantasy that you claim to be reality.
“4.It would further weaken the traditional family values essential to our society.The building blocks of our society and the thing that makes it strong is the traditional family of man, woman, and children. It is what has sustained us through two world wars, terrorist attacks, a Great Depression, and numerous other challenges over the centuries. While friends & lovers come and go, your family is always there. The main reason our culture and values have started to crumble is the weakening of families. Introducing another form of “family” would only make the situation worse.”
So two people who are in love would weaken traditional family values? Do recall that ‘traditional family values’ meant that women couldn’t vote or hold a position in office or do anything aside from cook and clean. Are you telling me that you don’t want women to have any rights? And considering you don’t have to be related by blood to be a family, you’re really just making excuses. Do you think that adopted children aren’t apart of the family they’re adopted into?
“5.It could provide a slippery slope in the legality of marriage”
Nope, you already lost. Mentioning the ‘slippery slope’ is a fallacy. You want to say someone wants to marry a dog or an inanimate object? Sure, why not, because they can totally sign legal documents and pay taxes, right? That reminds me, I need to remind my dog that he owes me rent from his job of barking at the door all day until I come home. And the bit about a couple of people abusing their power, that’s just f.ucking hilarious. Because, you know, it’s not like Christians or politicians abuse their power already. Then again, as long as you benefit from it, I guess you don’t care if they do, right?
“6.It confuses children about gender roles and expectations of society, and only a man & woman can pro-create.”
So because you feel that parents shouldn’t talk to their kids and tell them that boys can do things that are typically considered ‘girly’ and girls can do things that are typically considered ‘manly’ while still telling them that it takes a man’s sperm and a woman’s egg to make a baby, that’s why gay people can’t get married? You don’t want to talk to your future child for five f.ucking minutes and explain to him or her that every person is different? Well, all you’ve done here is show that you’re sexist if you truly believe this.
“7.The gay lifestyle is not something to be encouraged,”
Because people TOTALLY chose to be a part of one of the most hated groups on the planet, much like how you could control yourself to be black back when slavery was a thing and be a slave, or invert your d.ick and be a woman during a time where women’s rights didn’t exist.
“as a lot of research shows it leads to a much lower life expectancy,”
And this research is where? You keep saying it exists, I wanna see who did this research and when and every factor they took into account.
“psychological disorders,”
Again, they chose to be apart of a group that many people will torture and torment and assault because why the f.uck not! It sounded fun! You ever wonder if you torture your cousin by saying he shouldn’t be allowed to marry, and he knows deep in his heart that you actually just revile him, that you think he isn’t normal and that his behavior is ‘disgusting’ and ‘unhealthy’ even though that’s his very nature? Or do you really just get a kick out of it and don’t care?
“There is the picture.”
So let me get this straight; aside from the fact that you can’t count, you think that gay marriage shouldn’t be allowed because of: ‘traditional family values’ (even though those values have been changing steadily for the past existence), it ‘weakening’ marriage (which you put up the idea of divorce as the major fault for, so then why bring it up as something against gay marriage if it’ll strengthen marriage since you have a flood of people who have been with one another for so much of their life being married, and thus in retrospect it’ll be strengthened since they’ve been with their spouse longer), the slippery slope fallacy, sexism, and you think it’s a lifestyle that’s evil.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:56 pm
Wait a minute…Did you just call me average abuser?…!
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:50 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=r8l7ygkxTuU
The sound of my thought process.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
5:52 pm
Cold blooded you’ve slaughtered the innocent
Your merciless sport is so bloody
But not for much longer
The day will come you will burn in a fire of requital
You will bleed for your dreadful actions
In the end you will whine, but there’s no mercy
And there will be bloodshed
But it won’t be that of the innocent
Cold bloodshed!
I always loved this song. It was the first pure hardcore song I listened to all the way through and liked it.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
7:01 pm
nifty.org yeah you know you want to although avoid the adult youth section it’s a tad weird
Praise or Condemn:
0 
1
8:40 pm
I have this ah f*ck it JUSTWATCH THIS
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KzEptxYDNAY
GOOD LUCK SLEEPING
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
9:45 pm
8:44 pm and I can’t seem to find anything to do maybe ill ego to the golden cat in dishonored again or play witches 2 hangover mission come on christwire post about video games or e ills of satanism or something thatbismutter bullsh t
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0
4:29 pm
Bad news, it was officially proved that Justin Beiber was smoking pot…It is also officially proved that he is not a murderer.
Mark E. Figs was only 30% right. That’s a good start I guess.
Praise or Condemn:
0 
0