As we all already WELL know (Duh!), porn access on live non-filtered internet is only moments away by typing in a few common or typical choice keywords (such as "nude girls," "naked teens," etc.) into the Search Boxes of Search Engines such as Google, Bing, Yahoo, and Dogpile.
So convenient. Seems a cheap, quick, easily-disposable, satisfying-enough recourse to use -- "temporarily" venturing into the exciting and apparently-safe-enough world of non-social-complications cyber-erotica.
However . . .
Matthew 5:28 "But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman (and/or nude photo of one or more on the internet) lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."
"Adultery" is having erotic desire or sexual appreciation for someone (or their photographic image) indecently exposing (or having exposed as they are viewed) certain body-parts nakedness who is not even common-law married to the one lusting at them or someone currently belonging to someone else or destined at some future time to belong to someone else.
Proverbs 14:16 A wise man is cautious and turns away from evil, but a fool throws off restraint and is careless.
Proverbs 22:3 A prudent man sees ("probable-cause" nudity) danger and hides himself; but the naive go on, and suffer for it.
Proverbs 27:12 A prudent man sees danger and hides himself; but the gullible go on, and suffer for it.
Proverbs 23:18 Surely there is a future (of legitimate sexual satisfaction and fulfillment for you), and your (erotic) hope will not be cut off.
Proverbs 24:14 Know that wisdom is such to your soul; if you find it, there will be a future, and your hope will not be cut off.
Jeremiah 29:11 For I know the plans I have for you, says the LORD, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope (with cunnilingus and fellatio, if so craved).
Proverbs 17:14 The beginning of strife (or defiling captivation by engaging in curious search of if and what porn is available or still available at certain website locations) is like letting out water; so quit before the quarrel (or erotic lust) breaks out.
Proverbs 30:33 For pressing milk produces curds, pressing the nose produces blood (pressing the penis produces semen), and pressing anger produces strife.
If you/I have been (and FREQUENTLY in fact ARE) overwhelmed by having been visually assaulted by quasi-or-semi-indecent pix (or, worse yet, live-person imposition) of mopheaded or nude-armed or naked-legged or soxless human females, and private actual-body common-law concubines claiming you or me as their husband is NOT IMMEDIATELY available for sexual relief, the temptation is to promptly and secretly search for, discover, and lust at PHENOMENALLY-easy-to-access porn on the Web.
Helpful it is to keep the following Bible verses in mind:
First Peter 4:3 Let the time that is past suffice for doing what the Gentiles like to do, living in licentiousness (i.e. be attired immodestly in general public view, and/or producing and viewing porno imagery), passions, drunkenness, revels, carousing, and lawless idolatry.
First Timothy 5:14 So I would have younger women marry, bear children, manage their households, and give the enemy no cause to revile us.
First Corinthians 10:13 No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.
WHAT "way of escape?"
Matthew 7:11 "If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him!"
Luke 11:13 "If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!"
Matthew 7:7 "Ask (a dating service for a potential spouse), and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you."
Luke 11:9 "And I tell you, Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you (and the dating service will inform you of potential spouses for you to date)."
Proverbs 6:9 How long will you lie there, sluggard? When will you arise from your sleep?
Proverbs 13:4 The soul of the sluggard craves, and gets nothing, while the soul of the diligent is richly supplied.
Proverbs 20:4 The sluggard does not plow in the autumn; he/she will seek at harvest and have nothing.
Proverbs 21:25 The desire of the sluggard kills him, for his/her hands refuse to labor.
Do not quit until you acquire the date of your aspirations:
Ecclesiastes 9:10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with your might; for there is no work or thought or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol, to which you are going.
If you're frustrated while you wait meanwhile, and feel like cursing God (i.e. blaspheming the Spirit) . . . think first of the dire eternal consequences.
Ecclesiastes 5:2 Be not rash with your mouth, nor let your heart be hasty to utter a word before God, for God is in heaven, and you upon Earth; therefore let your words be few.
First Peter 4:7 The end of all things is at hand; therefore keep sane and sober for your prayers.
Discrimination is not synonymous with discernment, because discrimination has the additional factor or characteristic of making judgments of choice, sometimes involving acceptance of a particular person(s) or ideological philosophy or religious concept while at the same time rejecting some other person(s) or opposing (not simply "contrasting") ideological philosophy or religious concept.
Discrimination CAN be godly (or righteous) discrimination (as the Judeo-Christian Sacred-66-books Holy Bible defines "godly" and "righteous") is ALWAYS good and beneficial (as that Bible also defines both of those terms).
Consider "traffic-control lights" at some road intersections.
Notice that I did not instead call them "stoplights." (Had I done so, the one-sided or biased would consider that "negative" - and we all should not be thus narrow-minded, should we?).
"Good" (law-enforcement-officers-approved) drivers DO discriminate regarding (and not "concerning") both red compared with green intersection-control lights. They stop at red, but go through at green, and do not do both simultaneously.
It is not that drivers hate red lights by usually going through on green ones, nor that they hate green lights by usually stopping at red ones. As the Old-Testament states: "There is a time and place for everything," and one must not seek acquiescing and compromising peace when war for survival is expedient, nor wimpishly love in fear-of-humanity cowardice when bold, brave, and courageous hate is both vital and crucial.
They instead do what they usually do under threat of punishment pertaining to the possibility of choosing to not responsibly discriminate and not physically respond accordingly when and for how long they clearly should (and must!) discriminate in those situations.
They are under legal compulsion and requirement to share and take turns at intersections by means of intersection-control lights, for orderly traffic flow as most everyone's mutually-understood and operationally-agreed-upon purpose.
I would guess that if the very-improbable occurred . . . if BOTH red AND green lights appeared together at once at some intersection, most drivers (but perhaps not all) would tend toward the negative by slowing down to some extent, cautiously looking both ways, and carefully but quickly proceeding through that intersection if then when they perceive all is clear at the time.
The previously-mentioned discrimination is applicable to the areas of Biblically-alluded-to moral and immoral thoughts and actions, as in the areas of choosing to go through with or instead stop concerning committing the sinful perversion of becoming and being homogay sodomites contrasted with performing marital heterosexuality, committing the sin of anti-reproductively murdering human babes in wombs contrasted with the clinical and medical health of performing childbirth and nurturing reproduced same-kind-lifeform human offspring, committing the heresy of espousing evolution mythology contrasted with performing allegiance to logical and thoroughly-documented historical Biblical young-Earth creationism, etc.
This Christian/Jewish/Muslim-oriented Web-based or other entity, business, restaurant, prepay gas-n-groceries store, hardware store, worship center, realty, motel, bank, etc. - under present DOMA federal law - legally reserves the right to prohibit entrance by, and/or employment and/or affiliated association with, the following persons:
(1) Homosexual couples claiming to be "married" who have acquired State Sodomy-Union Licenses or Biblically-defined equivalents.
(2) Female humans publicly exposing loose long hair (longer than mouth-level), sleevesless naked arms, slacksless nude legs, and/or socksless bare feet in noisy/attention-getting flipflop sandals.
(3) Anyone who smokes and/or publicly exposes any non-earring body piercings and/or visible tattoos.
(4) Any male publicly wearing a ring or rings in either or both of their earlobes and/or utters profanity.
(5) Any adult human not carrying a concealed weapon, and a KJVplus RSV Bible.
There are those damned-to-become self-righteous who reject God's morally-decent modesty righteousness and substitute their own lurid satanic-apostasy replacement - hypocritically excusing and arrogantly self-justifying themselves with divisive judgmental irrationalizations as non-admitted "men-pleasers," who:
- call the committing of abortion homicide: "performing" "reproductive freedom" - when plainly there is absolutely NOTHING "reproductive" about MURDERING human womb babies - whether or not "choice" is involved
- espouse the anti-creationist heretical myth of evolution - and mis-call that: "science"
- claim that God-is-at-fault-because-I-was-born-that-way deviate-craving homosexual choice is: "love" - when it obviously and actually is: LEWD LUST, and who claim that sodomy unions (licensed or not) are Biblical "marriages" and are "equal" with and must be defined as [Scripturally-recorded]: MARRIAGES
- mouth the antisemitic word "palestinians" when they are (in fact): anti-Zionists, who despise Israeli settlers as alleged (illicit) "occupiers"
- purport that indecent public exposure of a woman's loose long hair (longer than mouth-level), sleevesless nude arms, slacksless naked legs exposed by warm-weather shorts, and socksless bare feet in noisy attention-getting flipflop sandals . . . are "art" and "nobody's business but their own" - therefore are free and have "the right" to impose and flaunt their harassive feminist-sexist filth in the faces of irritated and angered hapless victims at their own selfish and irresponsbile whims.
AVOID such people. Do not associate with them.
The willfully blind leading the deliberately blind will BOTH fall into The Pit - eventually.
- http://smotevart.tripod.com (Icorigin)
IF some stars in the night sky are zillions of light-years distant (as we have been told by whoever that there actually were), and IF light speed has always been and continues to be a constant 186,000 miles per second in our immutably-fixed perfect-interrelationally-ordered and interdependent Universe, and IF the Earth and the entire Universe are 8000 Earth years old, but that zillions-of-light-years-distant light from such stars had to have been travelling zillions of years to reach us here on 8000-year-old Earth, then we on this 8000-year-old planet have been able to view only the first 8000 years of the start of those zillions-of-light-years distant stars.
In that oxymoronic supposition of internally-vastly-discrepant time periods, would not the primal creation of those stars themselves (whatever that looked like) in the first place have been observable to us within that 8000-year-duration period of starlight travel time? [And let's not delve into absurd conjectures of time portals, time zones, time warps, and other relativistically-hallucinogenic gobbledigook].
Some have proposed that God created the beams of light from distant stars [ Wrong! Instead, God merely created whatever light we see, regardless of any supposed source it presumably emanated from ] already on their way to the earth. After all, Adam didn’t need any time to grow from a baby because he was made as [ "as?"] an adult.
Likewise, it is "argued" that the universe was made mature, and so perhaps the light was created in-transit [ or: en-route ].
Of course, the universe was indeed made to function right from the [ start of the ] first week, and many aspects of it were indeed created “mature.”
The only problem with assuming that the light was created in-transit (according to Lisle and Ham) is that we see things happen in space. [ Wrong! We have seen and continuously see NOT "things happen" but rather we see phenomena which apparently happened though are very real which, not at all necessarily, have been nor are related to some presumed distant source ].
For example, we see stars [ Wrong! We see "star"-LIGHT ] change brightness, move, and explode. [ Wrong! We see "star"-light presented in the pattern of a previous presumed brightness, movement, or explosion ].
We see these things because their light has reached us [Wrong! NOT "their" light has reached us, but instead simply light of whatever with or without presumed far-distant origin has and continues to reach us ].
But if God created the light beams already on their way, then that means none of the events we see in space (beyond a distance of 8,000 light-years) actually happened. [ Wrong! WHAT presumed "events" seen in space allegedly started at some far-distant source in time past? ]
It would mean that those exploding stars never exploded or existed [Wrong! WHAT "stars" exploded? - all we have seen and continue to see is LIGHT of the explosion phenomenon]; God merely painted pictures of these fictional events. [ Wrong again! God does not "paint" "pictures" nor "fiction." ]
It seems ["Seems?" Why not come right out and instead say: 'Is? ]uncharacteristic of God to make [ lying? ]illusions [ illusions? ] like this. God made our eyes to accurately probe the real universe [so all of what we actually do see is NOT real?]; so we can trust that the events [ WHAT "events?" Relating to what purported pre-existing "things?"] that we see in space really happened [ "Happened?" Or instead simply: are visible? ].
When we see an explosion of some firework on the Fourth of July, we see the light of such now-non-existing firework which in the very recent past exploded - NOT the actual thing itself that exploded:
Ephesians 5:13 . . . but when anything is exposed by the light it becomes visible, for anything that becomes visible is light.
We see photons from the object - NOT the object itself.
Indeed, the following Scripture verse has compound meaning, both relating to created of something where there previously was nothing, but the invisibility of actual objects only seen because of changing-energy-input-and-output electron shell-orbits [ Explore Google using the keywords: Common Sense Science ] producing visible photons:
Hebrews 11:3 By faith we understand that the world was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was made out of things which do not appear.
Pseudo-"scientists" misbelieve that light created in-transit is "not the best way" [ "best?" ]to respond to the distant starlight "argument."
Citing the instances of "we seeing" "stars" "change brightness and move" and "explode" concerning the question of "stars" actually being the far-distant and ongoing source of everything viewed, presumably zillions of light-years ago assuming constant light speed from Day 1 ] . . . is the reasonable query of whether or not that phenomena allegedly associated with once-existing stars was of necessity previously and actually originating from such stars.
In other words, God the Creator (and I believe non-dishonestly and non-deceitfully did) not only create actual stars apparently zillions of light-years distant, but also created en-route (i.e. in-transit) constantly-incoming light of less-than-8000-light-years-distant stars and other celestial phenomena (whether presumed stable, changing brightness and moving, exploding, or whatever) -- but their incoming light is NOT necessarily of [supposed] source stars zillions of light-years distant.
The bizarre phenomena of "stars falling from heaven" mentioned in:
Matthew 24:29 Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken;
Mark 13:25 . . . and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken.
. . . is maybe (but not likely) another en-route or in-transit phenomena which, though not yet seen by apocalyptic viewers, might already exist -- although correct interpretation of the possibly-metaphorical/figurative Scriptural term: "stars" could actually be an unusual and non-precedented, have-not-happened-yet, rain of meteors in Earth's atmosphere, globally observable (relating to the prophesied Millennial reign on Christ on planet Earth in the near future).
Consider the astronomical insight the Egyptian-educated-Jew Joseph had with his probably-metaphorical or symbolic reference to major planets [ which he called: "stars" ] of our Solar System:
Genesis 37:9 Then he dreamed another dream, and told it to his brothers, and said, "Hey, I have dreamed another dream; and hey, the sun, the moon, and eleven stars were bowing down to me."
Genesis 37:10 But when he told it to his father and to his brothers, his father rebuked him, and said to him, "What is this dream that you have dreamed? Shall I and your mother and your brothers indeed come to bow ourselves to the ground before you?"
In the Old Testament, the word "planet" is apparently not present, but - again - celestial bright spots (whatever they are) seem generally categorized merely as "stars:"
Deuteronomy 4:19 And beware lest you lift up your eyes to heaven, and when you see the sun and the moon and the stars, all the host of heaven [?], you be drawn away and worship them and serve them, things which the LORD your God has allotted to all the peoples under the whole heaven.
Psalm 93:1 The LORD reigns; He is robed in majesty; the LORD is robed, He is dressed with strength. Yes, the world is established; it shall never be moved
Isaiah 13:10 For the stars of the heavens and their constellations will not give their light; the sun will be dark at its rising and the moon will not shed its light.
Jeremiah 31:35 Thus says the LORD, who gives the sun for light by day and the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night, who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar - the LORD of hosts is His name:
And in the New Testament also, the word "planet" is nowhere to be found, and the reference to "morning star" might allude to either the rising Sun (as a star) or to the bright planet Venus:
First Corinthians 15:41 There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory.
Second Peter 1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy, to which you all do well that you all be attentive, as to a light which shines in a dark place, until the day dawn and the day star rises in your hearts,
Revelation 2:28 And I will give him the morning star.
Revelation 22:16 I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.
Revelation 8:12 The fourth angel blew his trumpet, and a third of the sun was struck, and a third of the moon, and a third of the stars, so that a third of their light was darkened; a third of the day was kept from shining, and likewise a third of the night.
What I guess is to be taken literally appears mixed in with what seems to have to be taken figuratively (or, metaphorically) in Job chapter 38:
Job 38:4 Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding.
5 Who determined its measurements - surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it?
6 On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone,
7 when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
8 Or who shut in the sea with doors, when it burst forth from the womb;
9 when I made clouds its garment, and thick darkness its swaddling band,
10 and prescribed bounds for it, and set bars and doors,
11 and said, 'Thus far shall you come, and no farther, and here shall your proud waves be stayed'?
12 Have you commanded the morning since your days began, and caused the dawn to know its place,
13 that it might take hold of the skirts of the earth, and the wicked be shaken out of it?
Evolutionists do NOT WANT to accept THE ONE Biblical Answer!
As to timing the supposedly-old age of some large trees on Earth, it behooves honest and accurate scientists to use mechanisms to correctly determine starting points of time, and open-mindededly investigate known-and-not-known alteration factors in time durations all along the way from the first incidence or appearance of possibly-already-adult-from-the-beginning trees, to the present.
It is not legitimate for evolution espousers like Bill Nye to - without acceptable cause and without adequate proofs - disregard the Biblical answers as to origins of environmental phenomena on Earth. Indeed, Ken Ham could press Nye and similar disbelievers who reject the Scriptural answers to origins as to WHY he and they do so, and thus if one definition of absurd and despicable "fool" is to reject - for no scientific reason(s) and substantiation - the Scriptural accounts of creation in the Old Testament book of Genesis.
Moreover, not only "fool" would be an appropriate term for the aforementioned who reject what is obvious and right in front of them, declared by clearly sane and intelligent, genuine and scholarly, scientists, but - consequently also, the term: "stupid" would be applicable. Pathetic it is for those atheists and naysayers who have the innate intelligence to think otherwise do not -- but because of their insidious rebellion against subjection to the God and Christ of Scripture, they make themselves asinine idiots, imbeciles, or at least morons . . . and dangerous-against-society ones at that - as they "glory in their [evolutionist-superstition] shame."
The claimed eagerness of Nye to "find out the answers" belies and contradicts his hypocritical negation against that very endeavor. Nye, in fact, does NOT WANT to find out origins answers, because if he did, he would at least give verifiable and testable proofs as to why THE ONE answer given in the Bible pertaining to creation must be misconstrued a diabolically-deliberate and outright-lying fable, legend, tale, metaphorical allegory, or deceitful myth, concocted by non-inspired devious Bible authors who blasphemously misrepresented both the Creator and the phenomena He created -- all to hatefully and prejudicially defame the heretic fabrication of evolutionary theory which allegedly existed from the beginning (but actually did NOT so exist).
WHAT is the best way to fight back against injust wrongdoers? Whether personally in a neighborhood or city setting, in politics and government, and whatever else?
Should their property be vandalized? His or her money be embezzled or stolen? His or her reputation or credibility defamed? They themselves injured or murdered?
The very words: "vandalized, embezzled, stolen, defamed," "injured," and "murdered" obviously imply non-authorized acts.
Seemingly-identical applied fulfillment of the words above might appear similar, but are instead to be described with fitting semantic definitions of what instead is legitimate, understandable, and justified as a necessary and expedient means to a righteous end.
We must first understand that vengeance belongs to God - whether the Lord does it directly through some coincidental-happenstance Act of God . . . or whether He decides, in some way, to call and mandate one of his human agents to apply forceful justice of whatever type on His behalf.
IF HE chooses to commission one of his chosen and non-hypocritically-qualified human agents to sensibly inflict selective havoc on a particular adversary, the Spirit of Jesus Christ (and concordant with His sacred-66-books Old-and-New-Testaments Holy Bible) determines who specifically (and only who) the punishment is to be applied to, what exactly the particular retribution will be, the severity, and duration, plus appropriate time and place for such to occur.
Even though angry emotion might be involved on the part of God's human executioner of whatever sort, that executioner must - in all rational and controlled sanity and caution - realize at all times that he is effecting justice on the Lord's behalf, and not merely his own.
The MN Marriage Amendment wording was so vague that it was almost worthless.
Marriage shall be the union [is THAT a business, military, or ecclesiastical union?] . . . of one man with one woman
[Once, twice, a few times? Temporary or permanently? For what purpose(s)? Sometimes or always with the same or different partners?]
It would have been MUCH preferable if the proposed Marriage Amendment phraseology had instead read that Marriage shall be the union of husband and wife.
The present and exact MN Marriage Amendment wording on the ballots SPECIFICALLY states that marriage shall be the union of one man with one woman. It does NOT read that Common-Law-Concubinal Cohabitation shall ONLY be the temporary or permanent sexual OR business union of one man with ONLY ONE compatible-enough woman or women.
IF the latter was the wording, IRS Form 1040 would have to be adjusted so that the 'Married" option would have to instead read: "PRIMARY Wife."
Voting NO on the lamentably-misworded [anti-harem-polygamy] Marriage Amendment ballot question essentially and simply disallows even marriage of one man to one woman.
Hello extinction against humankind!
In other words, voting NO on the ballot amendment proposal (or leaving it blank as a default NO) is saying that marriage must NOT be the union of man and woman, and in effect illegalized, without the freedom to so marry nor continue to be married in a one-man-with-one-women union.
That, obviously, is exactly, and the very opposite result-in-fact of the hideously-despicable orange lawn signs reading: "Vote NO. Don't Limit the Freedom to Marry."
Limiting (in fact, DISALLOWING) the freedom of a man to marry a woman is EXACTLY what the lawn signs hypocritically claim to not limit.
Yours truly cannot fully express in mere semantics the
intense and fervent admiration and appreciation for the
most-admirable very-modest decent exposure of
burka/hijab-attired muslim women, plus
patriarchal/non-matriarchal social structure of
islamic-fundamentalist men . . . diametrically-against,
understandably-contrary and righteously-opposed to
diabolical and noxious, sexually-harassing,
general-public-view mopheaded and/or
soxlessly barefooted in noisily-flipflopping sandals
annually-and-incessantly characteristic of many
females . . . along with their despicable and deplorable,
dangerously-irrational, confusion-causing, and irritating
The other evening when I saw and heard homosexual-advocate foreign-Brit Piers Morgan on CNN tell Ahmadinejad of Iran that Morgan believes homosexuals are born homosexual, Ahmadinejad responded with a "Why do want to impose something so ugly on other countries?"
Reminded me of the Bible verse:
Ezekiel 16:27 Hey, therefore, I stretched out my hand against you, and diminished your allotted portion, and delivered you to the greed of your enemies, the daughters of the Philistines, who were ashamed of your lewd behavior.
When Piers Morgan asked Ahmadinejad what he would do if Ahmadinejad's son told Ahmadinejad that that son was homosexual, Ahmadinejad replied that "corrective political and educational adjustments" would have to be made . . . and when Morgan asked the Iranian President what that Prez would do if his kid wanted to marry a Jew, Ahmadinejad responded in a relatively-ambivalent "What could I do about it?" stoic manner.
Moreover, it seems that "the prophet" Mohammed, who lived 500 years after Christ, was at least an anti-Jews/anti-Christians antagonist and even blasphemer - by not accepting long-ago-already-written Judeo-Christian (i.e. Old-and-New-Testaments) Scripture as THE Holy Book. . . then concoced an alternative, obviously-plagiaristic, significantly anti-semitic and anti-Christian, somewhat-morality-cognizant but satanically-versed Qur'an . . . and especially not accepting THE TRUE Isaac/Jacob/David-lineaged Creator, Redeemer, and LORD Jesus Christ - but instead substituting an imaginary and non-existent fiction he called: "allah" not defined by the traditional Judeo-Christian Old-and-New-Testaments Holy Bible.
Not only should the Equal Rights Amendment NOT be added to the United States Constitution, but there is NO excuse whatsoever for retaining the 19th Amendment, which basically states that the right to vote shall not be denied on the basis of "sex."
For one thing, the word "sex" is inappropriate, and should instead have been: "gender."
If the 19th Amendment was repealed, women could still vote and run for political office.
However, they would not be ENCOURAGED to do so with repeal of the 19th Amendment, which would obviously be concordant with repeated and clear directives of the 66-books Judeo-Christian Holy Bible upon which America was founded and yet operates -- congruent with such anti-sexism, anti-feminism, anti-chauvinism, patriarchal imperatives and inferences within Sacred Scripture as Leviticus 27:1-5, Numbers chapter 30, Ecclesiastes 7:26-27, Isaiah 3:12, Nahum 3:13, First Corinthians 11:1-16, First Corinthians 14:33-38, First Timothy 2:12-15, and First Peter 3:7.
If there are objectors to women either voting or running for political office after the 19th Amendment is repealed, the case should be handled by the Judiciary, and needs to go no farther than a majority decision by judges of the United States Supreme Court.
Hearts of Space Electronic Relaxation Music Hotlinks
The Co-ed Look
John Wesley New-Testament Passages
So You Want To Become or Be a Christian?
High-Powered Internet-Keystroke/Website-Visit Monitoring Software
"Evolution" is an illogical non-scientific false-religious superstition, concocted by intellectually-deviant pseudo-"scientists," wrongly presuming the anti-Scriptural myth that multi-million-year periods of time caused inception of different kinds of lifeforms through the impossibility of random non-designed chance assembly.
The 66-book Holy Bible
is a constitutionally-non-prohibited free religious expression
of the basic scientific description of created-entities-origin factual history.
Compare Different Bible Verses in Different Bible Versions!
Is the $1.50+/gallon of gasoline getting too much for you, after paying $3.50+ per gallon previously to fund Obama into political office?
Click into this All-Battery All-Electric Highway Cars hotlink!
Parallel Hebrew/English-&-Greek/English Text Bibles
No Gym Sox (color photos)
No Swim Sox (color photos)
RRB Obituary (w/pics)
Women in charge? See FemBinds!
Short Interlinear-Greek/English New-Testament Text
Short Interlinear-Greek/English New-Testament Passage Hotlinks
Augustana Hymns-Scores Notation
Augustana Hymns-Scores Hotlinks
Immersion or Sprinkling?
The Christian Church of St Nathaniel
IRS Regulations for IRS-Registered Churches/Synagogues/Mosques, and The CCC
Corrupt NASV/NASB New Testament
Flickr (Shawls and Robes)
Interlinear Greek-English NT Text Segments w/RRB movie clips
Augustana Black Hymnal Liturgy (Score and Lyrics)
LCA Red Hymnal Liturgy (Setting One)
LCA Red-Hymnal Scores (with Lyrics)
"Virgin" or "Maid" for Isaiah 7:14 regarding Mary?
Decent Public Hairstyles
Augustana Hymnal Liturgy with RRB pics
Baptist Hymn Scores Notation
Modern "Bible" Translations Ripoff
Biblical-Text Basis for Decent Female-Human Public Hairstyles
Bible Commentary on Hairstyle
YouTube Music Performance Hotlinks
Biblical-Text Basis for Decent Female-Human Public Hairstyles
Bible Versions Exposee
Corrupt NIV New Testament
I Peter 3:1-4 =
1 Likewise you wives, be submissive to your husbands, so that some, though they do not obey the word, may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives,
2 when they see your reverent and chaste behavior.
3 Let not yours be the outward adorning with braiding of hair, decoration of gold, and wearing of fine clothing,
4 but let it be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable jewel of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God's sight is very precious.
What "right" did God (i.e. Christ, the Son of God associated with the name: 'Jesus') have to create you and me?
First of all, no one made God. It is an invalid imposition of human errancy to presume that every existing entity had to be made by another entity, past or present or future, and pertaining to God, such is the case. God did not even make Himself. He always was, is, and will be.
No "right" is involved in God creating you and me. "Rights," of necessity, imply the existence of a superior umpire in perceivable situations, which umpire allows or gives permission to do things while forbidding other things to be committed with viable threat and enforcement of punishment for disobedience as to what is required by him.
In the case of the LORD, there never was, nor is now, nor will be, any equal or higher authority or referee than Him.
God did what He wanted done, because He had the capacity, the ability, the intention, and the power to do it all. So He did it all, because He could, and wanted to.
Therefore, we humans now exist, and will exist forever, as He (albeit somewhat indirectly in most cases) has informed us in His Divinely-inspired-and-conveyed Sacred-66-Books Judeo-Christian (Old-and-New-Testaments) Holy Bible.
It is not only senseless . . . in my opinion and the opinions of others similarly and essentially compliant with the Almighty . . . and the ultimate manifestation of disgusting obnoxiousness along with despicably-obscene and insane foolishness and stupidity, to react insubordinately and negatively in arrogant defiance against that admittedly benign and environmentally-accommodating Creator.
I myself, and others like me in attitude, sincerely and eagerly anticipate when such rebellious, hateful, and harassing filth will eternally be completely disassociated away from us.
Jesus actually did take upon Himself the sins of all HIS penitent homo-sapien creatures on planet Earth for all time, past and present and future . . . having benevolent, understandably-compensatory, and quasi-ob ligatory fair-minded compassion (as Garden-of-Eden-stumbling-blocks-Imposer) - being Creator and Owner of this Terrestial and Celestial Spheroid of HIS, which such humans who HE owns have inhabited, yet inhabit, and will inhabit.
This story has been shredded by Snopes. However, in the interest of reporting the full scope of what is being discussed and displayed online, the following story is posted:
The Mombasa Registrar of Births has testified that Obama's birth certificate from Coast Province General Hospital in Mombasa is genuine. [see http://breakingnews.topcities.com].
The grandmother of Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. reveals the story of his birth in Mombasa, Kenya , a seaport, after Barack Obama's mother suffered labor pains while swimming at ocean beach in Mombasa:
"On August 4, 1961 Obama's mother, father and grandmother were attending a Muslim festival in Mombasa , Kenya. Ann Durham Obama-Soetoro (Obama's mother) had been refused entry to airplanes due to her nine month pregnancy. It was a hot August day at the festival so the Obamas went to the beach to cool off. While swimming in the ocean his mother experienced labor pains so was rushed to the Coast Provincial General Hospital, Mombasa, Kenya where Obama was born a few hours later at 7:21 pm on August 4, 1961.
Four days later his mother flew to Hawaii and registered his birth in Honolulu as a Certificate of Live Brth which omitted the place and hospital of birth."
"Concerning WOMEN competing against MEN (getting pregnant and birthing children, excluded), women are NOT "equal" to men, but instead are inadequate, deficient, and inferior.
Women - in contrast to men - are generally weaker (in terms of muscular strength), weary sooner, protected by men (thus often outliving them), are shorter, lighter, take longer to urinate, are more moody, more superstitious, more deceptive, more secretive causing misunderstanding and sometimes serious inconvenience, more gullible, more inconsistent, less stable and less dependable while more illogical and many times being dangerously exploratory, less content and satisfied, more sexist and mindlessly slanderous, more non-cooperative, more deviant doctrinally and philosophically, more indifferent, less sensibly broadminded, more mechanically legalistic, more contentious, more fearful and less courageous, less talented and less inventive and less innovative, more vain, more extravagant, more sickly and dependent upon drugs and doctors, beset with bloody monthly menstrual periods, more presumptuous, and noisier."
TOPIC: Post-2014-Election Analysis
November 5th, 2014
WHAT is the best way to fight back against injust wrongdoers?
Against those who voted (in the November 2014 Election) for candidates with a proven campaign and/or voting record of having NOT advocated nor supported clear-and-unambiguous righteous anti-feminist/sexist, anti-abortion-homicide, and/or anti-homogay/homosodomy Biblical mandates and directives -- whether such voters were and/or are in our own neighborhood, township, city, county or state?
Should their property be vandalized? Tires slashed? Vehicles keyed on either side? Windows and headlights and tail lights battered with a baseball bat? House or car spray-painted? Their mailbox toppled? I.D. stolen? Lawn or pet poisoned? His or her money be embezzled or stolen? His or her reputation or credibility illegally defamed? They themselves injured or murdered?
Many of the violent acts suggested above obviously imply non-authorized and unlawful intentions and un-called-for excesses.
It initially seems that committing and not "performing" such actions against those who voted for the "wrong" candidates instead of the "right" ones is perhaps presumptuous for a number of reasons.
First of all, such errant voters might have been misinformed by misleading and deceptive media and other propaganda, and so have innocently voted for candidates they should not have voted for.
Secondly, if they knew full well the actual campaign platform, rhetoric, and/or voting records of the aberrant candidates they deliberately voted for, it is possible that they might now or later regret that they voted for whoever they voted for, and even go so far as to intend to remedy that by someday voting for candidates they should vote for, if they get another chance to vote in a future election.
But concerning (and not "regarding") those die-hard wicked with an incessantly wrong take on and attitudes about particularly sexual-social issues of political candidates (e.g. feminist sexism, homosexuality, fornication, adultery, homosodomy, pornography, indecent exposure, and even evolution), what should be done about and against them?
Should they be audited and scrutinized by the IRS of Lois Lerner ilk? Should police stake them out and see if they make complete stops at stop signs? Should salt and sugar - whether "accidentally" or deliberately - be left out of their homosodomy-unions-licensing "wedding" cakes? Should they be, at least anonymously, reported to various state agencies, to their business associates, and/or to extended church and family members? How about being blacklisted, and/or targeted with receiving shoddy service and/or products they purchase, and their mail-ordered materials be diverted and delayed?
Discreetly, and as politely as possible, they should be corrected by rectifying communications of all sorts -- whether by direct, confrontational, and corrective verbal comments, or at least anonymous letters, e-mail messages, notes left on their front or back residence doors or under their windshield wipers or slipped through their partially-open car windows or wherever.
If they relentlessly persist repeatedly voting for candidates known to take anti-Scriptural positions on various issues (particularly sexually-oriented ones as previously mentioned), it certainly behooves those saints who are irritated by such deviates to pray not "for" them but instead "against" them, plus (besides warning them by aforementioned communication conveyances), avoid such and not associate with them in all kinds of ways (including financial and business-oriented ones).
Ultimate punishment for those committing their demonic mis-voting shenanigans within the confines of what is generally considered current law/statutes/regulations "legality" is sometimes not possible from and by their righteous adversaries themselves, and often little or nothing physical can be done against them.
It is at that point that petitioning the LORD to apply His vengeance against them is expedient, which is done by prayer against (not "for") such individuals.
Scripture gives warnings to "not take matters into our own hands" beyond what Christ Jesus and His Holy Spirit actually and really do authorize, and if we go beyond, we might find we get ourselves into more trouble and complications than we can and should handle.
Not only does the Bible inform us to not be hypocrites ourselves (i.e. condemn others without first "cleaning up our own backyard" and taking the proverbial log out of our own eye before we attempt to take the speck out of our neighbor's), but to petition Jesus our Savior and Lord (by even earnest and fervent prayer) then patiently rely on The Divine Executioner to do any number or supernaturally-imaginative combinations of possible actions Himself to thwart, stifle, inconvenience, pollute, defile, unemploy, bankrupt, impoverish, injure by accident, handicap by disease, and however else punish those (and possessions of such) who, according to Scriptural designations, should be punished to whatever reasonable extent and severities they deserve.
Vengeance belongs to God and those who God authorizes to apply His retributional justice -- whether the Lord does it directly Himself through some coincidental-happenstance Act of God . . . or whether He decides, in some way, to call and mandate one of his human agents to apply forceful retaliation of whatever type(s) on His behalf.
Many examples in Scripture come to mind, including the Divinely-ordered exploits and conquests of Joshua essentially engaging in self-defense for himself and His relocating Hebrews, commanded to even completely annihilate vicious aggressors who came against them without good cause . . . and David who was appointed by both God and the military government of his time to be the chosen one to strike and decapitate the pagan-blasphemer Goliath.
IF the LORD chooses to commission one of his chosen and non-hypocritically-qualified human agents to sensibly and rationally inflict selective havoc on a particular adversary, the Holy Spirit determines who, specifically, (and only who), the punishment is to be administered to, what exactly the particular retribution will be, the means, the severity, the duration, plus the appropriate time and place for such to happen.
Even though angry emotion might be involved on the part of God's human executioner and execution of whatever sort, the LORD's enforcer [of whatever broad gamut that entails] must - in all calm and controlled conscience, sanity and caution - realize at all times that he is effecting justice on the Lord's behalf, and not merely for his or her own relief, satisfaction, and/or survival.