 | | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
(...) Minor point: Christmas is of Catholic origin, springing from Constantines pronouncement of Rome as a Christian Empire. They kept their basics practices and just changed the name plates on the base of their idols. In the Pilgrim days Christmas (...) (24 years ago, 16-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
(...) (URL) then did we receive our holidays (holy days) with their customs and traditions _ Christmas as well as Easter, Halloween, and Mardi Gras? Each of them has come to us from ancient Babylon, through Rome, through the Roman Catholic church. (...) (24 years ago, 15-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
(...) Not really - Xmas was a pagan ritual coopted by the Christians because they couldn't quash it. (...) But if you don't believe in Eternity, who cares? Certainly not the person that doesn't. (...) Actually, it was founded on freedom OF religion, (...) (24 years ago, 15-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Arguing about nature, Nature, and ethics
|
|
(...) (and in another post) (...) Mr. Pieniazek, You issued this challenge to me in another thread concerning sexual ethics. Perhaps you missed my note to Kevin which - to some degree - agrees with your concerns: --- The reasoning behind the sexual (...) (24 years ago, 16-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Problems with Christianity
|
|
(...) With great trepidation, I must ask: what makes you believe that? (...) This is what I kept challenging John Neal about (and that he never directly answered). What's more important: who Christ is, or what his message is? His (and yours) (...) (24 years ago, 15-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
|
"Dave Schuler" <orrex@excite.com> wrote in message news:G5MIGo.8H@lugnet.com... (...) I (...) the (...) is (...) a (...) I'll wait for Mr. Pieniazek to weigh in - to see if he was thinking along the same lines - before I respond. Thanks for your (...) (24 years ago, 16-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
|
(...) **snip** (...) Well, if you're going to get all technical on me... 8^) I confess I was reading from Larry's statement forward, that there was indeed the medical possibility of a male carrying a child. Put in the terms you revealed to me, (...) (24 years ago, 15-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
|
(...) So, what you are saying is that rape cannot exist within a marrage? Is this part of what you are trying to say? That a woman should be no more than a hole for a man? In spite of 50 years or more of court (and moral) decisions? I _dislike_ that (...) (24 years ago, 15-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
|
(...) Actually, I think it was quite on topic. Dave! was just trying to expose the precise line at which point it becomes immoral according to the proposed moral law. For example, IF (big if) homosexual sex could produce a child, would it then be (...) (24 years ago, 15-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Christian morality (cont)
|
|
Dave Schuler wrote in message ... (...) a (...) Dave, I don't think this has any bearing on Steve's original statement, which was that (...) The male animal bearing a fetus that you speak of was not a result of homosexual sex, nor could it have (...) (24 years ago, 15-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
